MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321491346 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.044041

Gravitational-wave energy and other fluxes in ghost-free bigravity

2023· article· en· W4321491346 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander M. Grant, Alexander Saffer, Leo C. Stein, Shammi Tahura

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphPerimeter Institute
FundersKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaOwens Family FoundationInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesWest Virginia University
KeywordsPhysicsGravitonGravitational waveGeneral relativityGravitationDiffeomorphismClassical mechanicsMassless particleTheoretical physicsInvariant (physics)Mathematical physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the key ingredients for making binary waveform predictions in a beyond-general-relativity (GR) theory of gravity is understanding the energy and angular momentum carried by gravitational waves and any other radiated fields. Identifying the appropriate energy functional is unclear in Hassan-Rosen bigravity, a ghost-free theory with one massive and one massless graviton. The difficulty arises from the new degrees of freedom and length scales which are not present in GR, rendering an Isaacson-style averaging calculation ambiguous. In this article we compute the energy carried by gravitational waves in bigravity starting from the action, using the canonical current formalism. The canonical current agrees with other common energy calculations in GR, and is unambiguous (modulo boundary terms), making it a convenient choice for quantifying the energy of gravitational waves in bigravity or any diffeomorphism-invariant theories of gravity. This calculation opens the door for future waveform modeling in bigravity to correctly include backreaction due to emission of gravitational waves.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→