Tensor Interpretation of BICEP2 Results Severely Constrains Axion Dark Matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent detection of B modes by the BICEP2 experiment has nontrivial implications for axion dark matter implied by combining the tensor interpretation with isocurvature constraints from Planck observations. In this Letter the measurement is taken as fact, and its implications considered, though further experimental verification is required. In the simplest inflation models, r=0.2 implies HI=1.1×10(14) GeV. If the axion decay constant fa 1 accounts for theoretical uncertainty). If fa>HI/2π then vacuum fluctuations of the axion field place conflicting demands on axion DM: isocurvature constraints require a DM abundance which is too small to be reached when the backreaction of fluctuations is included. High-fa QCD axions are thus ruled out. Constraints on axionlike particles, as a function of their mass and DM fraction, are also considered. For heavy axions with ma≳10(-22) eV we find Ωa/Ωd≲10(-3), with stronger constraints on heavier axions. Lighter axions, however, are allowed and (inflationary) model-independent constraints from the CMB temperature power spectrum and large scale structure are stronger than those implied by tensor modes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".