MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122016845 · doi:10.1142/s0217732320502910

The shadow of M87∗ black hole within rational nonlinear electrodynamics

2020· article· en· W3122016845 on OpenAlexaff
S. I. Kruglov

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Physics Letters A · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsBlack hole (networking)Schwarzschild radiusCharged black holeEvent horizonGravitational singularityFuzzballExtremal black holeRotating black holeGeneral relativityShadow (psychology)Quantum electrodynamicsWhite holeHawking radiationClassical mechanicsMathematical physicsHorizonQuantum mechanicsSpacetimeGravitationGravitational collapse

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider rational nonlinear electrodynamics with the Lagrangian [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text] is the Lorentz invariant), proposed in Ref. 63, coupled to General Relativity. The effective geometry induced by nonlinear electrodynamics corrections are found. We determine shadow’s size of regular non-rotating magnetic black holes and compare them with the shadow size of the super-massive M87[Formula: see text] black hole imaged by the Event Horizon Telescope collaboration. Assuming that the black hole mass has a pure electromagnetic nature, we obtain the black hole magnetic charge. The size of the shadow obtained is very close to the shadow size of non-regular neutral Schwarzschild black holes. As a result, we can interpret the super-massive M87[Formula: see text] black hole as a regular (without singularities) magnetized 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations46
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Physics Letters ASame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207