AN ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATION FOR THE MODULI FIELDS OF THE COSMOLOGY ASSOCIATED TO TYPE IIB SUPERGRAVITY WITH FLUXES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this work is to provide a basis to interpret the dilaton as the dark matter of the universe, in the context of a particular cosmological model derived from type IIB supergravity theory with fluxes. In this theory, the dilaton is usually interpreted as a quintessence field. But, with this alternative interpretation we find that (in this supergravity model) the model gives a similar evolution and structure formation of the universe compared with the ΛCDM model in the linear regime of fluctuations of the structure formation. Some free parameters of the theory are fixed using the present cosmological observations. In the nonlinear regime there are some differences between the type IIB supergravity theory with the traditional CDM paradigm. The supergravity theory predicts the formation of galaxies earlier than the CDM and there is no density cusp in the center of galaxies. These differences can distinguish both models and might give a distinctive feature to the phenomenology of the cosmology coming from superstring theory with fluxes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".