MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521881145 · doi:10.1007/jhep05(2017)071

A small weak scale from a small cosmological constant

2017· article· en· W2521881145 on OpenAlexaff
Asimina Arvanitaki, Savas Dimopoulos, V. Gorbenko, Junwu Huang, Ken Van Tilburg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle PhysicsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHierarchy problemParticle physicsElectroweak interactionHiggs bosonCosmological constantElectroweak scaleScalar (mathematics)Physics beyond the Standard ModelDark matterTheoretical physicsFermionExtra dimensionsGravitationQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a framework in which Weinberg’s anthropic explanation of the cosmological constant problem also solves the hierarchy problem. The weak scale is selected by chiral dynamics that controls the stabilization of an extra dimension. When the Higgs vacuum expectation value is close to a fermion mass scale, the radius of an extra dimension becomes large, and develops an enhanced number of vacua available to scan the cosmological constant down to its observed value. At low energies, the radion necessarily appears as an unnaturally light scalar, in a range of masses and couplings accessible to fifth-force searches as well as scalar dark matter searches with atomic clocks and gravitational-wave detectors. The fermion sector that controls the size of the extra dimension consists of a pair of electroweak doublets and several singlets. These leptons satisfy approximate mass relations related to the weak scale and are accessible to the LHC and future colliders.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

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

Citations67
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207