Exploring holographic Composite Higgs models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simple Composite Higgs models predict new vector-like fermions not too far from the electroweak scale, yet LHC limits are now sensitive to the TeV scale. Motivated by this tension, we explore the holographic dual of the minimal model, MCHM5, to try and alleviate this tension without increasing the fine-tuning in the Higgs potential. Interestingly, we find that lowering the UV cutoff in the 5D picture allows for heavier top partners and less fine-tuning. In the 4D dual this corresponds to increasing the number of “colours” N , thus increasing the decay constant of the Goldstone Higgs. This is essentially a ‘Little Randall-Sundrum Model’, which are known to reduce some flavour and electroweak constraints. Furthermore, in anticipation of the ongoing efforts at the LHC to put bounds on the top Yukawa, we demonstrate that deviations from the SM can be suppressed or enhanced with respect to what is expected from mere symmetry arguments in 4D. We conclude that the 5D holographic realisation of the MCHM5 with a small UV cutoff is not in tension with the current experimental data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".