MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Darkening the little Higgs

2013· article· en· W1997867788 on OpenAlexaff
Travis Martin, Alejandro de la Puente

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Letters B · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHiggs bosonParticle physicsPhysicsDark matterScalar (mathematics)Higgs mechanismParity (physics)Gauge bosonTheoretical physicsHiggs fieldGauge theoryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel new method for incorporating dark matter into little Higgs models in a way that can be applied to many existing models without introducing T -parity, while simultaneously alleviating precision constraints arising from heavy gauge bosons. The low energy scalar potential of these dark little Higgs models is similar to, and can draw upon existing phenomenological studies of, inert doublet models. Furthermore, we apply this method to modify the littlest Higgs model to create the next to littlest Higgs model, and describe details of the dark matter candidate and its contribution to the relic density.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics Letters BSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207