Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a cartoon of the quantization of General Relativity using the ideas of effective field theory. These ideas underpin the use of General Relativity as a theory from which precise predictions are possible, since they show why quantum corrections to standard classical calculations are small. Quantum corrections can be computed controllably provided they are made for the weakly-curved geometries associated with precision tests of General Relativity, such as within the solar system or for binary pulsars. They also bring gravity back into the mainstream of physics, by showing that its quantization (at low energies) exactly parallels the quantization of other, better understood, non-renormalizable field theories which arise elsewhere in physics. Of course effective field theory techniques do not solve the fundamental problems of quantum gravity discussed elsewhere in these pages, but they do helpfully show that these problems are specific to applications on very small distance scales. They also show why we may safely reject any proposals to modify gravity at long distances if these involve low-energy problems (like ghosts or instabilities), since such problems are unlikely to be removed by the details of the ultimate understanding of gravity at microscopic scales.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".