MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2209534779 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.124067

Consistency of scalar potentials from quantum de Sitter space

2016· article· en· W2209534779 on OpenAlexafffund
J. R. Espinosa, Jean-François Fortin, Maxime Trépanier

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsPhysicsDe Sitter spaceCosmological constantVacuum energyDe Sitter universede Sitter invariant special relativityCosmological constant problemHierarchy problemFalse vacuumScalar fieldTheoretical physicsQuantum gravityMathematical physicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsDark energyElectroweak interactionQuantumCosmologyUniverse

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consistency of the unconventional view of de Sitter space as a quantum theory of gravity with a finite number of degrees of freedom requires that Coleman--De Luccia tunneling rates to vacua with negative cosmological constant should be interpreted as recurrences to low-entropy states. This demand translates into two constraints, or consistency conditions, on the scalar potential that are generically as follows: (1) the distance in field space between the de Sitter vacuum and any other vacuum with negative cosmological constant must be of the order of the reduced Planck mass or larger and (2) the fourth root of the vacuum energy density of the de Sitter vacuum must be smaller than the fourth root of the typical scale of the scalar potential. These consistency conditions shed a different light on both outstanding hierarchy problems of the standard model of particle physics: the scale of electroweak symmetry breaking and the scale of the cosmological constant. Beyond the unconventional interpretation of quantum de Sitter space, we complete the analytic understanding of the thin-wall approximation of Coleman--De Luccia tunneling, extend its numerical analysis to generic potentials and discuss the role of gravity in stabilizing the standard model potential.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→