MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Black Hole Formation in Randall-Sundrum II Braneworlds

2016· article· en· W2336077228 on OpenAlexafffund
Daoyan Wang, Matthew W. Choptuik

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsPhysicsRandall–Sundrum modelBraneScalar fieldAnsatzMassless particleBlack hole (networking)Black braneScalar (mathematics)Theoretical physicsClassical mechanicsGravitationMathematical physicsExtremal black holeQuantum mechanicsGeometryEntropy (arrow of time)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first numerical study of the full dynamics of a braneworld scenario, working within the framework of the single brane model of Randall and Sundrum. In particular, we study the process of gravitational collapse driven by a massless scalar field which is confined to the brane. Imposing spherical symmetry on the brane, we show that the evolutions of sufficiently strong initial configurations of the scalar field result in black holes that have finite extension into the bulk. Furthermore, we find preliminary evidence that the black holes generated form a unique sequence, irrespective of the details of the initial data. The black hole solutions we obtain from dynamical evolutions are consistent with those previously computed from a static vacuum ansatz.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→