MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606527061 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.104049

Hamiltonian analysis of the cuscuton

2017· article· en· W2606527061 on OpenAlexafffund
Henrique Gomes, Daniel C. Guariento

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsHamiltonian (control theory)PhysicsScalar fieldMathematical physicsCosmologyDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)CurvatureClassical mechanicsConstant curvatureMathematicsGeometryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cuscuton was introduced in the context of cosmology as a field with infinite speed of propagation. It has been claimed to resemble Ho\ifmmode \check{r}\else \v{r}\fi{}ava gravity in a certain limit, and it is a good candidate for an ether theory in which a time-dependent cosmological constant appears naturally. The analysis of its properties is usually performed in the Lagrangian framework, which makes issues like the counting of its dynamical degrees of freedom less clear-cut. Here we perform a Hamiltonian analysis of the theory. We show that the homogeneous limit with local degrees of freedom has singular behavior in the Hamiltonian framework. In other frames, it has an extra scalar degree of freedom. The homogeneous field has regular behavior only if defined a priori as a spatially constant field in a constant mean curvature foliation and contributing with a single global degree of freedom. Lastly, we find conditions on the cuscuton potential for the resulting lapse function to be nonzero throughout evolution.

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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.416 · 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

Citations52
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207