MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528124853 · doi:10.1142/s0218271817500754

Black hole solution in the framework of arctan-electrodynamics

2017· article· en· W2528124853 on OpenAlexaff
S. I. Kruglov

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics D · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsBlack hole (networking)Charged black holeCoulombRotating black holeMathematical physicsGravitationQuantum electrodynamicsExtremal black holeQuantum mechanicsSchwarzschild radiusEntropy (arrow of time)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An arctan-electrodynamics coupled with the gravitational field is investigated. We obtain the regular black hole solution that at [Formula: see text] gives corrections to the Reissner–Nordström solution. The corrections to Coulomb’s law at [Formula: see text] are found. We evaluate the mass of the black hole that is a function of the dimensional parameter [Formula: see text] introduced in the model. The magnetically charged black hole was investigated and we have obtained the magnetic mass of the black hole and the metric function at [Formula: see text]. The regular black hole solution is obtained at [Formula: see text] with the de Sitter core. We show that there is no singularity of the Ricci scalar for electrically and magnetically charged black holes. Restrictions on the electric and magnetic fields are found that follow from the requirement of the absence of superluminal sound speed and the requirement of a classical stability.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics DSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207