MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032484559 · doi:10.1134/1.1663997

Universal temperature corrections to the free energy for the gravitational field

2003· article· en· W2032484559 on OpenAlexaff
G. E. Volovik, Andrei Zelnikov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPlanck energyGravitational constantGravitational fieldPlanck massSuperfluidityGravitationPlanckPlanck lengthQuasiparticleField (mathematics)Planck constantQuantum mechanicsQuantum electrodynamicsQuantum gravityQuantumPlanck scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The temperature correction to the free energy of the gravitational field is considered which does not depend on the Planck energy physics. The leading correction may be interpreted in terms of the temperature-dependent effective gravitational constant G eff . The temperature correction to appears to be valid for all temperatures T ⩽ E Planck . It is universal since it is determined only by the number of fermionic and bosonic fields with masses m ⩽ T , does not contain the Planck energy scale E Planck which determines the gravitational constant at T =0, and does not depend on whether or not the gravitational field obeys the Einstein equations. That is why this universal modification of the free energy for gravitational field can be used to study thermodynamics of quantum systems in condensed matter (such as quantum liquids superfluid 3 He and 4 He), where the effective gravity emerging for fermionic and/or bosonic quasiparticles in the low-energy corner is quite different from the Einstein gravity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics LettersSame topicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamicsFrench-language works237,207