MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320923299 · doi:10.1063/5.0099551

Teleparallel geometry with a single affine symmetry

2023· article· en· W4320923299 on OpenAlexafffund
A. A. Coley, R. J. van den Hoogen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityDalhousie University
FundersRES’EAU-WaterNETSt. Francis Xavier University
KeywordsSymmetry (geometry)Lorentz transformationAffine transformationAffine geometryHomogeneous spaceGauge theoryAffine connectionGauge symmetryPhysicsMathematical physicsField (mathematics)Classical mechanicsGeometryTheoretical physicsMathematicsAffine spacePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In teleparallel geometries, symmetries are represented by affine frame symmetries that constrain both the (co)frame basis and the spin-connection (which are the primary geometric objects). In this paper, we shall study teleparallel geometries with a single affine symmetry, utilizing the locally Lorentz covariant approach and adopting a complex null gauge. We first introduce an algorithm to study geometries with an affine frame symmetry, which consists of choosing coordinates adapted to the symmetry, constructing a canonical frame, and solving the equations describing the symmetry. All of the constraints on the geometry are determined in the case of a single affine symmetry, but there are additional constraints arising from the field equations for a given theory of teleparallel gravity. In particular, we find that in f(T) teleparallel gravity there will be severe constraints on the geometry arising from the antisymmetric part of the field equations.

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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207