MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2092181621 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.104040

Black holes and fundamental fields: Hair, kicks, and a gravitational Magnus effect

2014· article· en· W2092181621 on OpenAlexaff
H. Okawa, Vítor Cardoso

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersAgence Nationale de Recherches sur le Sida et les Hépatites Virales
KeywordsPhysicsBlack hole (networking)Scalar fieldMassless particleScalar (mathematics)Schwarzschild radiusWhite holeClassical mechanicsRotating black holeTheoretical physicsGravitationAccretion (finance)Particle physicsAstrophysicsGravitational collapseGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scalar fields pervade theoretical physics and are a fundamental ingredient to solve the dark matter problem, to realize the Peccei-Quinn mechanism in QCD or the string-axiverse scenario. They are also a useful proxy for more complex matter interactions, such as accretion disks or matter in extreme conditions. Here, we study the collision between scalar ``clouds'' and rotating black holes. For the first time we are able to compare analytic estimates and strong field, nonlinear numerical calculations for this problem. As the black hole pierces through the cloud it accretes according to the Bondi-Hoyle prediction, but is deflected through a purely kinematic gravitational ``anti-Magnus'' effect, which we predict to be present also during the interaction of black holes with accretion disks. After the interaction is over, we find large recoil velocities in the transverse direction. The end-state of the process belongs to the vacuum Kerr family if the scalar is massless, but can be a hairy black hole when the scalar is massive.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→