MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001092647 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.70.065002

Limits on Lorentz violation from the highest energy cosmic rays

2004· article· en· W2001092647 on OpenAlex
Olivier Gagnon, Guy D. Moore

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsLambdaCosmic rayLorentz transformationParticle physicsMomentum (technical analysis)HadronPlanckEnergy (signal processing)AstrophysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We place several new limits on Lorentz violating effects, which can modify particles' dispersion relations, by considering the highest energy cosmic rays observed. Since these are hadrons, this involves considering the partonic content of such cosmic rays. We get a number of bounds on differences in maximum propagation speeds, which are typically bounded at the ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}21}$ level, and on momentum dependent dispersion corrections of the form $v=1\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}{p}^{2}/{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}^{2}$, which typically bound $\ensuremath{\Lambda}>{10}^{21}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}$, well above the Planck scale. For ($CPT$ violating) dispersion correction of the form $v=1+p/\ensuremath{\Lambda}$, the bounds are up to 15 orders of magnitude beyond the Planck scale.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.297 · 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