Effective potential and topological photon spheres: a novel approach to black hole parameter classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we base our analysis on the assumption that the existence of a photon sphere is an intrinsic characteristic of any ultra-compact gravitational structure with spherical symmetry. Utilizing the concept of a topological photon sphere, we categorize the behaviors of various gravitational models based on the structure of their photon spheres. This innovative approach enables us to define boundaries for black hole parameters, subsequently enabling us to classify the model as either a black hole or naked singularity. We demonstrate that the presence of this interplay between the gravitational structure and the existence of a photon sphere is a unique advantage that can be utilized from both perspectives. Our observations indicate that a gravitational model typically exhibits the behavior of a horizonless structure (or naked singularity) when a minimum effective potential (a stable photon sphere) appears within the studied spacetime region. Additionally, in this study, we investigate the effect of this structure on the behavior of the photon sphere by selecting models that are affected by Perfect Fluid Dark Matter (PFDM). Finally, by analyzing a model with multiple event horizons, we show that the proposed method remains applicable even in such scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".