MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027905007 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2008/05/016

Gravitational wave constraints on multi-brane inflation

2008· article· en· W2027905007 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Huston, James E. Lidsey, Steven Thomas, John Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsInflatonBraneBrane cosmologyObservableGravitational waveCosmological perturbation theoryCurvatureNon-GaussianityInflation (cosmology)Scalar (mathematics)Effective actionTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsCosmic microwave backgroundGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A class of non-canonical inflationary models is identified, where the leading-order contribution to the non-Gaussianity of the curvature perturbation is determined by the sound speed of the fluctuations in the inflaton field. Included in this class of models is the effective action for multiple coincident branes in the finite n limit. The action for this configuration is determined using a powerful iterative technique, based upon the fundamental representation of SU (2). In principle the upper bounds on the tensor–scalar ratio that arise in the standard, single-brane DBI inflationary scenario can be relaxed in such multi-brane configurations if a large and detectable non-Gaussianity is generated. Moreover models with a small number of coincident branes could generate a gravitational wave background that will be observable in future experiments.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations23
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207