MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2260246157 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.123501

Disruption of cosmic string wakes by Gaussian fluctuations

2016· article· en· W2260246157 on OpenAlexafffund
Disrael Camargo Neves da Cunha, Robert Brandenberger, Oscar F. Hernández

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPhysicsCosmic stringRedshiftString (physics)COSMIC cancer databaseGaussianTension (geology)Position (finance)AstrophysicsSpace (punctuation)Stability (learning theory)Theoretical physicsMathematical physicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the stability of cosmic string wakes against the disruption by the dominant Gaussian fluctuations which are present in cosmological models. We find that for a string tension given by $G\ensuremath{\mu}={10}^{\ensuremath{-}7}$ wakes remain locally stable until a redshift of $z=6$, and for a value of $G\ensuremath{\mu}={10}^{\ensuremath{-}14}$ they are stable beyond a redshift of $z=20$. We study a global stability criterion which shows that wakes created by strings at times after ${t}_{\mathrm{eq}}$ are identifiable up to the present time, independent of the value of $G\ensuremath{\mu}$. Taking into account our criteria it is possible to develop strategies to search for the distinctive position space signals in cosmological maps which are induced by wakes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→