MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157130400 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.063507

Matter creation in a nonsingular bouncing cosmology

2014· article· en· W2157130400 on OpenAlexafffund
Jerome Quintin, Yi-Fu Cai, Robert Brandenberger

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 institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEkpyrotic universePhysicsUniverseCosmologyTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsSteady State theoryDe Sitter universeQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine reheating in the two-field matter bounce cosmology. In this model, the Universe evolves from a matter-dominated phase of contraction to an Ekpyrotic phase of contraction before the nonsingular bounce. The Ekpyrotic phase frees the model from unwanted anisotropies, but leaves the Universe cold and empty of particles after the bounce. For this reason, we explore two particle production mechanisms which take place during the course of the cosmological evolution: Parker particle production where the matter field couples only to gravity and particle creation via interactions between the matter field and the bounce field. Although we show that both mechanisms can produce particles in this model, we find that Parker particle production is sufficient to reheat the Universe to high temperatures. Thus there is a priori no need to add an interaction term to the Lagrangian of the model. Still, particle creation via interactions can contribute to the formation of matter and radiation, but only if the coupling between the fields is tuned to be large.

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)0.001
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 score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations116
Published2014
Admission routes2
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