MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2408959490 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.064008

Parallel adaptive event horizon finder for numerical relativity

2016· article· en· W2408959490 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andy Bohn, Saul A. Teukolsky

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEvent horizonLIGONumerical relativityDelaunay triangulationBlack hole (networking)PhysicsGeodesicBinary black holeEvent (particle physics)General relativityHorizonGravitational waveComputer scienceClassical mechanicsAlgorithmGeometryMathematicsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With Advanced LIGO detecting the gravitational waves emitted from a pair of merging black holes in late 2015, we have a new perspective into the strong field regime of binary black hole systems. Event horizons are the defining features of such black hole spacetimes. We introduce a new code for locating event horizons in numerical simulations based on a Delaunay triangulation on a topological sphere. The code can automatically refine arbitrary regions of the event horizon surface to find and explore features such as the hole in a toroidal event horizon, as discussed in our companion paper. We also investigate various ways of integrating the geodesic equation and find evolution equations that can be integrated efficiently with high accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.473
Teacher spread0.445 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→