MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2759297298 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.124013

Blandford-Znajek process <i>in vacuo</i> and its holographic dual

2019· article· en· W2759297298 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ted Jacobson, María J. Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaUtah State UniversityUniversity of MarylandGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsBlack hole (networking)Angular momentumRotating black holeThermalJoule heatingQuantum electrodynamicsSpinningClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsThermodynamicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blandford and Znajek discovered a process by which a spinning black hole can transfer rotational energy to a plasma, offering a mechanism for energy and jet emissions from quasars. Here we describe a version of this mechanism that operates with only vacuum electromagnetic fields outside the black hole. The setting, which is not astrophysically realistic, involves either a cylindrical black hole or one that lives in $2+1$ spacetime dimensions, and the field is given in simple, closed form for a wide class of metrics. For asymptotically anti--de Sitter black holes in $2+1$ dimensions, the holographic dual of this mechanism is the transfer of angular momentum and energy, via a resistive coupling, from a rotating thermal state containing an electric field to an external charge density rotating more slowly than the thermal state. In particular, the entropy increase of the thermal state due to Joule heating matches the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy increase of the black hole.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→