MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380447041 · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/acde2f

Reflecting boundary conditions in numerical relativity as a model for black hole echoes

2023· article· en· W4380447041 on OpenAlexafffund
Conner Dailey, Niayesh Afshordi, Erik Schnetter

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsNumerical relativityBlack hole (networking)Classical mechanicsHorizonScalar fieldSpacetimeBoundary (topology)Apparent horizonBoundary value problemGeneral relativityTheoretical physicsEvent horizonQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisNetwork packet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recently, there has been much interest in black hole echoes, based on the idea that there may be some mechanism (e.g. from quantum gravity) that waves/fields falling into a black hole could partially reflect off of an interface before reaching the horizon. There does not seem to be a good understanding of how to properly model a reflecting surface in numerical relativity, as the vast majority of the literature avoids the implementation of artificial boundaries, or applies transmitting boundary conditions. Here, we present a framework for reflecting a scalar field in a fully dynamical spherically symmetric spacetime, and implement it numerically. We study the evolution of a wave packet in this situation and its numerical convergence, including when the location of a reflecting boundary is very close to the horizon of a black hole. This opens the door to model exotic near-horizon physics within full numerical relativity.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207