How natural is a small<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mover><mml:mrow><mml:mi>θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>¯</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math>in left-right supersymmetry models?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a world without an axion, the smallness of $\overline{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ may be achieved due to a spontaneously broken discrete left-right symmetry. We analyze the radiatively induced $\overline{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ in the context of generic left-right symmetric supersymmetry models without assuming flavor degeneracy in the squark sector. Left-right symmetry allows us to keep $\overline{\ensuremath{\theta}}$ within its present bound only if the intergenerational mass splitting in the squark sector at the scale of the left-right symmetry breaking is smaller than 0.5%. We also consider the naturalness of the ${m}_{u}=0$ solution to the strong CP problem in the context of horizontal flavor symmetries. A strong bound on the combination of the horizontal charges in the up quark sector is found in this case.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".