MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3164057464 · doi:10.1007/jhep08(2021)154

Two-dimensional black holes in the limiting curvature theory of gravity

2021· article· en· W3164057464 on OpenAlexafffund
Valeri P. Frolov, Andrei Zelnikov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsCurvatureLimitingDilatonPhysicsSingularityBlack hole (networking)Massive gravityClassical mechanicsTheoretical physicsGravitationGeometryMathematicsComputer scienceGraviton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we discuss modified gravity models in which growth of the curvature is dynamically restricted. To illustrate interesting features of such models we consider a modification of two-dimensional dilaton gravity theory which satisfies the limiting curvature condition. We show that such a model describes two-dimensional black holes which contain the de Sitter-like core instead of the singularity of the original non-modified theory. In the second part of the paper we study Vaidya type solutions of the model of the limiting curvature theory of gravity and used them to analyse properties of black holes which are created by the collapse of null fluid. We also apply these solutions to study interesting features of a black hole evaporation.

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 score0.007

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→