MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154011964 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.123528

Theory of self-resonance after inflation. I. Adiabatic and isocurvature Goldstone modes

2014· article· en· W2154011964 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark P. Hertzberg, Johanna Karouby, William G. Spitzer, Juana C. Becerra, Lanqing Li

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMIT Sea Grant, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsAdiabatic processInflatonInflation (cosmology)Symmetry breakingInstabilityClassical mechanicsSymmetry (geometry)Theoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop a theory of self-resonance after inflation. We study a large class of models involving multiple scalar fields with an internal symmetry. For illustration, we often specialize to dimension-four potentials, but we derive results for general potentials. This is the first part of a two part series of papers. Here in part 1 we especially focus on the behavior of long-wavelength modes, which are found to govern most of the important physics. Since the inflaton background spontaneously breaks the time-translation symmetry and the internal symmetry, we obtain Goldstone modes; these are the adiabatic and isocurvature modes. We find general conditions on the potential for when a large instability band exists for these modes at long wavelengths. For the adiabatic mode, this is determined by a sound speed derived from the time-averaged potential, while for the isocurvature mode, this is determined by a speed derived from a time-averaged auxiliary potential. Interestingly, we find that this instability band usually exists for one of these classes of modes, rather than both simultaneously. We focus on backgrounds that evolve radially in field space, as set up by inflation, and also mention circular orbits, as relevant to $Q$-balls. In part 2 [M. P. Hertzberg et al., Phys. Rev. D 90, 123529 (2014)] we derive the central behavior from the underlying description of many-particle quantum mechanics, and introduce a weak breaking of the symmetry to study corrections to particle-antiparticle production from preheating.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations30
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207