MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788356420 · doi:10.1007/jhep09(2018)048

On the dynamics of near-extremal black holes

2018· article· en· W2788356420 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaUniversity of KentuckyInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueSimons Foundation
KeywordsSymmetry breakingDynamics (music)Black hole (networking)Symmetry (geometry)Scalar (mathematics)Scalar fieldWork (physics)Critical phenomenaSpacetime

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract We analyse the dynamics of near-extremal Reissner-Nordström black holes in asymptotically four-dimensional Anti de Sitter space (AdS 4 ). We work in the spherically symmetric approximation and study the thermodynamics and the response to a probe scalar field. We find that the behaviour of the system, at low energies and to leading order in our approximations, is well described by the Jackiw-Teitelboim (JT) model of gravity. In fact, this behaviour can be understood from symmetry considerations and arises due to the breaking of time reparametrisation invariance. The JT model has been analysed in considerable detail recently and related to the behaviour of the SYK model. Our results indicate that features in these models which arise from symmetry considerations alone are more general and present quite universally in near-extremal black holes.

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 score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations179
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207