MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954997909 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.021501

Dipolar tidal effects in scalar-tensor theories

2020· article· en· W2954997909 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laura Bernard

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceGovernment of CanadaInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsPhysicsScalar (mathematics)General relativityEinstein TelescopeScalar fieldMassless particleDipoleGravitationClassical mechanicsGravitational waveTheoretical physicsMathematical physicsAstrophysicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inclusion of finite-size effects in the gravitational waveform templates allows one not only to constrain the internal structure of compact objects, but to test deviations from general relativity. Here, we address the problem of tidal effects in massless scalar-tensor theories. We introduce the scalar-type tidal Love numbers that relate the time-varying scalar dipole moment to the induced scalar tidal field. We compute the leading-order scalar tidal contribution in the conservative dynamics and for the first time in the wave generation for quasicircular orbits. Importantly, we show that, in a system dominated by dipolar emission, such tidal effects may be detectable by third generation detectors such as the Einstein Telescope.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.435 · 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

Citations50
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207