MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331491637 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.064034

Gravitational collapse of generalized Vaidya spacetime

2014· article· en· W2331491637 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maombi D. Mkenyeleye, Rituparno Goswami, Sunil D. Maharaj

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of DodomaInyuvesi Yakwazulu-NataliNational Research FoundationDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaRyerson University
KeywordsCosmic censorship hypothesisGravitational singularitySpacetimeGravitational collapsePhysicsSingularityNaked singularityGeodesicGravitationCurvatureContext (archaeology)Mathematical physicsTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the gravitational collapse of a generalized Vaidya spacetime in the context of the cosmic censorship hypothesis. We develop a general mathematical framework to study the conditions on the mass function so that future directed nonspacelike geodesics can terminate at the singularity in the past. Thus our result generalizes earlier works on gravitational collapse of the combinations of Type-I and Type-II matter fields. Our analysis shows transparently that there exist classes of generalized Vaidya mass functions for which the collapse terminates with a locally naked central singularity. We calculate the strength of these singularities to show that they are strong curvature singularities and there can be no extension of spacetime through them.

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)0.001
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations61
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207