MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409019474 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.063072

Maximal gravitational wave signal from asteroid-mass primordial black hole mergers at resonant microwave cavities

2025· article· en· W4409019474 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Profumo, L. W. Brown, Christopher Ewasiuk, Sean Ricarte

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsGravitational wavePhysicsMicrowaveAsteroidSIGNAL (programming language)AstrophysicsAstronomyAstrobiologyQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primordial black holes can be the entirety of the dark matter in a broad, approximately 5-orders-of-magnitude-wide mass range, the ``asteroid mass range,'' between ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}16}{M}_{\text{Sun}}$---where constraints originate from evaporation---and ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}11}{M}_{\text{Sun}}$---from microlensing. A direct detection in this mass range is very challenging with any known observational or experimental methods. Here we update the calculation of the sight distance for narrow-band detectors such as resonant microwave cavities and the resulting maximal event rate. We find that the largest detection rates are associated with binaries from nonmonochromatic mass functions in early-formed three-body systems. Even in the most optimistic setup, these events are anticipated to be extremely rare.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.399 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→