MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396813874 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.104034

Renormalization-group perspective on gravitational critical collapse

2024· article· en· W4396813874 on OpenAlexafffund
Huan Yang, Liujun Zou

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphPerimeter Institute
FundersKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRenormalization groupPerspective (graphical)PhysicsGravitationCritical phenomenaFunctional renormalization groupGravitational collapseMathematical physicsCritical dimensionTheoretical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsMathematicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryPhase transition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we propose extremal black holes (BH) as critical points of a new class of gravitational collapses. The conjecture is made by observing the continuous self-similarity (CSS) and discrete self-similarity (DSS) behaviors of perturbations of an extremal black hole spacetime and compare them to similar properties of Choptuik-type critical solutions. By performing analytical perturbation studies on extremal black holes, we explicitly show that the DSS solution found here can be interpreted as renormalization group (RG) limit cycles, and the transition between CSS and DSS regimes occurs as the stable and unstable fixed points collide and move to the complex plane. We argue that the DSS solutions found in spherically symmetric gravitational collapses can be similarly interpreted. We identify various phenomena in nongravitational systems with RG limit cycles, including DSS correlation function, DSS scaling laws in correlation length, and order parameters, which are observed in gravitational critical collapses. We also discuss a version of gravitational Efimov effect.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.424 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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