MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885536891 · doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3002

Propagation of electromagnetic waves in MOG: gravitational lensing

2018· article· en· W2885536891 on OpenAlexaff
S. Rahvar, J. W. Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsGeodesics in general relativityGeneral relativityGravitational lensGravitational waveSupermassive black holeClassical mechanicsDeflection (physics)GravitationStrong gravitational lensingAstrophysicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the solution of Maxwell’s equations in curved spacetime within the framework of modified gravity (MOG). We show that besides the null-geodesic treatment of photons in MOG, using Maxwell’s equations and covariant coupling with the extra vector sector of gravitation in MOG, we can extract the equation for the propagation of light. We obtain Fermat’s potential and calculate the deflection angle of light during lensing from a point-like star. Our results show that the deflection angle obtained from the solution of the wave equation in MOG for the large-scale structures with larger impact parameter of light rays is proportional to that of general relativity (GR). For solar mass stars the deflection angle agrees with the prediction of GR. However, for the compact structures like the supermassive black hole Sagittarius A* at the centre of the Milky Way, the prediction for the deflection angle is larger than GR, which can be tested in future observations.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207