Fine-tuning with brane-localized flux in 6D supergravity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are claims in the literature that the cosmological constant problem could be solved in a braneworld model with two large (micron-sized) supersymmetric extra dimensions. The mechanism relies on two basic ingredients: first, the cosmological constant only curves the compact bulk geometry into a rugby shape while the 4D curvature stays flat. Second, a brane-localized flux term is introduced in order to circumvent Weinberg’s fine-tuning argument, which otherwise enters here through a backdoor via the flux quantization condition. In this paper, we show that the latter mechanism does not work in the way it was designed: the only localized flux coupling that guarantees a flat on-brane geometry is one which preserves the scale invariance of the bulk theory. Consequently, Weinberg’s argument applies, making a fine-tuning necessary again. The only remaining window of opportunity lies within scale invariance breaking brane couplings, for which the tuning could be avoided. Whether the corresponding 4D curvature could be kept under control and in agreement with the observed value will be answered in our companion paper [1].
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".