MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distinguishing a Slowly Accelerating Black Hole by Differential Time Delays of Images

2022· article· en· W3209102928 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDigital Holography and Microscopy
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Marie Sklodowska-Curie ActionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeIran Science Elites FederationUniversity of Guilan
KeywordsPhysicsDifferential (mechanical device)Black hole (networking)Classical mechanicsComputer scienceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accelerating supermassive black holes, connected to cosmic strings, could contribute to structure formation and get captured by galaxies if their velocities are small. This would mean that the acceleration of these black holes is small, too. Such a slow acceleration has no significant effect on the shadow of such supermassive black holes. We also show that, for slowly accelerating black holes, the angular position of images in the gravitational lensing effects does not change significantly. We propose a method to observe the acceleration of these black holes through gravitational lensing. The method is based on the observation that differential time delays associated with the images are substantially different with respect to the case of nonaccelerating black holes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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