MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Black Hole Solutions as Topological Thermodynamic Defects

2022· article· en· W4307888925 on OpenAlexafffund
Shao-Wen Wei, Yu-Xiao Liu, Robert B. Mann

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPhysicsBlack hole (networking)Winding numberBlack hole thermodynamicsExtremal black holeTopology (electrical circuits)BTZ black holeBlack braneTheoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsEntropy (arrow of time)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Letter, employing the generalized off-shell free energy, we treat black hole solutions as defects in the thermodynamic parameter space. The results show that the positive and negative winding numbers corresponding to the defects indicate the local thermodynamical stable and unstable black hole solutions, respectively. The topological number defined as the sum of the winding numbers for all the black hole branches at an arbitrary given temperature is found to be a universal number independent of the black hole parameters. Moreover, this topological number only depends on the thermodynamic asymptotic behaviors of the black hole temperature at small and large black hole limits. Different black hole systems are characterized by three classes via this topological number. This number could help us in better understanding the black hole thermodynamics and, further, shed new light on the fundamental nature of quantum gravity.

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 communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations226
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207