MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092628949 · doi:10.1103/physreve.65.026128

Statistical mechanics of relativistic one-dimensional self-gravitating systems

2002· article· en· W2092628949 on OpenAlexaff
Robert B. Mann, P. Chak

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStatistical Mechanics and Entropy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsStatistical mechanicsRelativistic particleEnergy–momentum relationRelativistic mechanicsClassical mechanicsDistribution functionPartition function (quantum field theory)Momentum (technical analysis)Relativistic quantum chemistryDistribution (mathematics)Position (finance)GravitationMathematical physicsTheory of relativityQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the statistical mechanics of a general relativistic one-dimensional self-gravitating system. The system consists of N particles coupled to lineal gravity and can be considered as a model of N relativistically interacting sheets of uniform mass. The partition function and one-particle distribution functions are computed to leading order in 1/c where c is the speed of light; as c --> infinity results for the nonrelativistic one-dimensional self-gravitating system are recovered. We find that relativistic effects generally cause both position and momentum distribution functions to become more sharply peaked, and that the temperature of a relativistic gas is smaller than its nonrelativistic counterpart at the same fixed energy. We consider the large-N limit of our results and compare this to the nonrelativistic case.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topicsSame topicStatistical Mechanics and EntropyFrench-language works237,207