MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2619847274 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2017-0711

Spinor field in Bianchi type-IX space–time

2018· article· en· W2619847274 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bijan Saha

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSpinorSpinor fieldMathematical physicsTensor (intrinsic definition)Field (mathematics)IsotropySpace (punctuation)LambdaQuantum mechanicsGeometryPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the scope of Bianchi type-IX cosmological model we have studied the role of spinor field in the evolution of the Universe. It is found that unlike the diagonal Bianchi models in this case the components of energy–momentum tensor of spinor field along the principal axis are not the same (i.e., [Formula: see text]), even in the absence of spinor field nonlinearity. The presence of nontrivial non-diagonal components of energy–momentum tensor of the spinor field imposes severe restrictions both on geometry of space–time and on the spinor field itself. As a result the space–time turns out to be either locally rotationally symmetric or isotropic. In this paper we considered the Bianchi type-IX space–time both for a trivial b, that corresponds to standard Bianchi type-IX and the one with a non-trivial b. It was found that a positive self-coupling constant λ1 gives rise to an oscillatory mode of expansion, while a trivial λ1 leads to rapid expansion at the early stage of evolution.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→