MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2005247936 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.89.016012

Higgs production in general 5D warped models

2014· article· en· W2005247936 on OpenAlexafffund
Mariana Frank, Nima Pourtolami, Manuel Toharia

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHiggs bosonParticle physicsPhysicsLarge Hadron ColliderElectroweak interactionContext (archaeology)Physics beyond the Standard ModelProduction (economics)Extra dimensions

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We calculate the production rate of the Higgs boson at the LHC in the context of general five-dimensional (5D) warped scenarios with space-time background modified from the usual ${\mathrm{AdS}}_{5}$, and where all the Standard Model fields, including the Higgs, propagate in the bulk. This modification can alleviate considerably the bounds coming from precision electroweak tests and flavor physics. We evaluate the Higgs production rate and show that it is generically consistent with the current experimental results from the LHC for Kaluza-Klein masses as low as 2 TeV, unlike in pure ${\mathrm{AdS}}_{5}$ scenarios, where for the same masses, the Higgs production typically receives corrections too large to be consistent with LHC data. Thus the new pressure on warped models arising from LHC Higgs data is also alleviated in ${\mathrm{AdS}}_{5}$-modified warped scenarios.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→