MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562273147 · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aa9312

A numerical relativity scheme for cosmological simulations

2017· article· en· W2562273147 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Daverio, Yves Dirian, Ermis Mitsou

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueNational Eye InstituteChina Scholarship CouncilScience and Technology Facilities CouncilSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsPhysicsCovariant transformationGeneral relativityCosmologyPerfect fluidTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsGravitationRobustness (evolution)Numerical relativityTheory of relativityMathematical physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cosmological simulations involving the fully covariant gravitational dynamics may prove relevant in understanding relativistic/non-linear features and, therefore, in taking better advantage of the upcoming large scale structure survey data. We propose a new 3 + 1 integration scheme for general relativity in the case where the matter sector contains a minimally-coupled perfect fluid field. The original feature is that we completely eliminate the fluid components through the constraint equations, thus remaining with a set of unconstrained evolution equations for the rest of the fields. This procedure does not constrain the lapse function and shift vector, so it holds in arbitrary gauge and also works for arbitrary equation of state. An important advantage of this scheme is that it allows one to define and pass an adaptation of the robustness test to the cosmological context, at least in the case of pressureless perfect fluid matter, which is the relevant one for late-time cosmology.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207