MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109949262 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.013009

Electroweak baryogenesis and Higgs signatures

2012· article· en· W2109949262 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Cohen, David E. Morrissey, Aaron Pierce

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBaryogenesisPhysicsParticle physicsElectroweak interactionHiggs bosonTechnicolorHiggs fieldHiggs mechanismMinimal Supersymmetric Standard ModelStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Higgs sectorGauge bosonGauge theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore the connection between the strength of the electroweak phase transition and the properties of the Higgs boson. Our interest is in regions of parameter space that can realize electroweak baryogenesis. We do so in a simplified framework in which a single Higgs field couples to new scalar fields charged under $SU(3{)}_{c}$ by way of the Higgs portal. Such new scalars can make the electroweak phase transition more strongly first-order, while contributing to the effective Higgs boson couplings to gluons and photons through loop effects. For Higgs boson masses in the range $115\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}\ensuremath{\lesssim}{m}_{h}\ensuremath{\lesssim}130\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$, whenever the phase transition becomes strong enough for successful electroweak baryogenesis, we find that Higgs boson properties are modified by an amount observable by the LHC. We also discuss the baryogenesis window of the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM), which appears to be under tension. Furthermore, we argue that the discovery of a Higgs boson with standard model-like couplings to gluons and photons will rule out electroweak baryogenesis in the MSSM.

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)0.001
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 score0.142
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 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

Citations80
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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