MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3035415812 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.044020

Turning a Newtonian analogy for FLRW cosmology into a relativistic problem

2020· article· en· W3035415812 on OpenAlexafffund
Valerio Faraoni, Farah Atieh

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBishop's University
KeywordsAnalogyFriedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metricCosmologyNewtonian fluidPhysicsTheoretical physicsEinsteinClassical mechanicsFriedmann equationsQuantum cosmologyMathematical physicsDark energyPhilosophyAstrophysicsEpistemologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Newtonian uniform ball expanding in empty space constitutes a common heuristic analogy for FLRW cosmology. We discuss possible implementations of the corresponding general-relativistic problem and a variety of new cosmological analogies arising from them. We highlight essential ingredients of the Newtonian analogy, including the fact that the Hawking-Hayward quasilocal mass that is always ``Newtonian'' in the sense that the magnetic part of the Weyl tensor does not contribute to it. A symmetry of the Einstein-Friedmann equations produces another one in the original Newtonian system.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.376 · 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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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