MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052679799 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2012-0531

Generalized ghost dark energy in Brans–Dicke theory

2013· article· en· W2052679799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Sheykhi, Esmaeil Ebrahimi, Yousef Yousefi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShiraz UniversityResearch Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha
KeywordsPhysicsDark energyEquation of stateDeceleration parameterCosmologyHubble's lawBrans–Dicke theoryDark fluidMathematical physicsUniverseTheoretical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It was argued that the vacuum energy of the Veneziano ghost field of QCD, in a time-dependent background, can be written in the general form, H + O(H2), where H is the Hubble parameter. Based on this, a phenomenological dark energy model whose energy density is of the form ρ = αH + βH2 was recently proposed to explain the dark energy dominated universe. In this paper, we investigate this generalized ghost dark energy model in the setup of Brans–Dicke cosmology. We study the cosmological implications of this model. In particular, we obtain the equation of state, the deceleration parameters, and a differential equation governing the evolution of this dark energy model. It is shown that the equation of state parameter of the generalized ghost dark energy can cross the phantom line (wD = −1) in some range of the parameters spaces.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207