MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416147389 · doi:10.1103/hcx1-hcf9

From spatial to null infinity: Connecting initial data to peeling

2025· article· en· W4416147389 on OpenAlexafffund
Berend Schneider, Neev Khera

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNull (SQL)Antisymmetric relationMetric (unit)InfinityClass (philosophy)Homogeneous spaceAsymptotic expansionDivergence (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The asymptotic structure of space-time is studied by imposing conditions on the asymptotics of the metric. These conditions are weak enough to include large classes of physically relevant isolated space-times, but have a rich enough structure to be able to define important physically meaningful quantities like mass, angular momentum, and gravitational waves. By using a unified expansion of the metric in a neighborhood of spatial infinity that includes a piece of null infinity, we connect the asymptotic expansions of solutions to Einstein's equations in the different asymptotic regimes. Within the class of space-times under consideration, we find a connection between the peeling properties of the Weyl scalars and symmetries of initial data near spatial infinity. In particular, we show that for initial data that to leading order is symmetric under $\mathrm{parity}+\text{time}$ reversal, ${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Psi}}}_{2}$ has the usual $1/{r}^{3}$ fall-off rate at null infinity. If, in addition, the subleading part of the data is antisymmetric under $\mathrm{parity}+\text{time}$ reversal, then ${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Psi}}}_{1}$ has the usual $1/{r}^{4}$ fall-off rate at future null infinity.

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)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.438 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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