No-hair and almost-no-hair results for static axisymmetric black holes and ultracompact objects in astrophysical environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract No-hair theorems are uniqueness results constraining the form of the metric of black holes in general relativity. These theorems are typically formulated under idealized assumptions, involving a mixture of local (regularity of the horizon) and global aspects (everywhere vacuum spacetime and asymptotic flatness). This limits their applicability to astrophysical scenarios of interest such as binary black holes and accreting systems, as well as their extension to horizonless objects. A previous result due to Gürlebeck constrains the asymptotic multipolar structure of static spacetimes containing black holes surrounded by matter although not revealing the possible structure of the metric itself. In this work, we disentangle some of these assumptions in the static and axisymmetric case. Specifically: (i) we show that only a one-parameter family of black-hole geometries is compatible with a given external gravitational field, (ii) we also analyze the case in which the central object is close to forming an event horizon but is still horizonless and show that the deviations from the natural black-hole shape have to die off as one approaches the black hole limit under the physical principle that curvatures are bounded.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".