MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2178599313 · doi:10.1119/1.4935771

Simulating Gravity: Dark Matter and Gravitational Lensing in the Classroom

2015· article· en· W2178599313 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Physics Teacher · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsScience World at Telus World of ScienceUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDark matterPhysicsGravitationGravitational lensAstronomyWeak gravitational lensingUniverseTheoretical physicsAstrophysicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dark matter makes up most of the matter in the universe but very little of a standard introductory physics curriculum. Here we present our construction and use of a spandex sheet-style gravity simulator to qualitatively demonstrate two aspects of modern physics related to dark matter. First, we describe an activity in which students explore the dependence of orbital velocities on the central mass of a system, in a demonstration of how scientists first discovered dark matter. Second, we discuss the use of the gravity simulator as a visualization of gravitational lensing, a current astronomical technique for mapping dark matter in the sky. After providing the necessary background for the phenomena of interest, we describe our construction of the gravity simulator and detail our facilitation of these two activities. Together, these activities provide a conceptual visualization of gravitational phenomena related to indirect detection techniques for studying dark matter.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.258 · 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