MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2208392515 · doi:10.1142/s0217732315300281

A review of WIMP baryogenesis mechanisms

2015· review· en· W2208392515 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Physics Letters A · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBaryogenesisPhysicsWIMPParticle physicsBaryon asymmetryDark matterWeakly interacting massive particlesCosmologyPhysics beyond the Standard ModelLarge Hadron ColliderMassive particleNuclear physicsScalar field dark matterAstrophysicsDark energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It was recently proposed that weakly interacting massive particles (WIMP) may provide new ways of generating the observed baryon asymmetry in the early universe, as well as addressing the cosmic coincidence between dark matter (DM) and baryon abundances. This suggests a new possible connection between weak scale new particle physics and modern cosmology. This review summarizes the general ideas and simple model examples of the two recently proposed WIMP baryogenesis mechanisms: baryogenesis from WIMP DM annihilation during thermal freeze-out, and baryogenesis from metastable WIMP decay after thermal freeze-out. This review also discusses the interesting phenomenology of these models, in particular, the experimental signals that can be probed in the intensity frontier experiments and the large hadron collider (LHC) experiments.

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.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.251 · 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