MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402272310 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/09/015

Neural networks assisted Metropolis-Hastings for Bayesian estimation of critical exponent on elliptic black hole solution in 4D using quantum perturbation theory

2024· article· en· W4402272310 on OpenAlexaff
Armin Hatefi, Ehsan Hatefi, Roberto J. López-Sastre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCritical exponentPerturbation theory (quantum mechanics)Statistical physicsBayesian probabilityQuantumPerturbation (astronomy)ExponentBlack hole (networking)Artificial neural networkMetropolis–Hastings algorithmQuantum mechanicsArtificial intelligenceMarkov chain Monte CarloComputer sciencePhase transition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is well-known that the critical gravitational collapse produces continuous self-similar solutions characterized by the Choptuik critical exponent, γ. We examine the solutions in the domains of the linear perturbation equations, considering the numerical measurement errors. Specifically, we study quantum perturbation theory for the four-dimensional Einstein-axion-dilaton system of the elliptic class of SL(2,ℝ) transformations. We develop a novel artificial neural network-assisted Metropolis-Hastings algorithm based on quantum perturbation theory to find the distribution of the critical exponent in a Bayesian framework. Unlike existing methods, this new probabilistic approach identifies the available deterministic solution and explores the range of physically distinguishable critical exponents that may arise due to numerical measurement errors.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207