MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606750785 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2017)058

Composite dark matter and Higgs

2017· article· en· W2606750785 on OpenAlexaff
Yongcheng Wu, T. Ma, Bin Zhang, Giacomo Cacciapaglia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsHiggs bosonDark matterGauge bosonParameter spacePhysics beyond the Standard ModelStandard Model (mathematical formulation)BosonLarge Hadron ColliderGauge theoryGauge (firearms)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the possibility that Dark Matter arises as a composite state of a fundamental confining dynamics, together with the Higgs boson. We focus on the minimal SU(4)×SU(4)/SU(4) model which has both a Dark Matter and a Higgs candidates arising as pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons. At the same time, a simple underlying gauge-fermion theory can be defined providing an existence proof of, and useful constraints on, the effective field theory description. We focus on the parameter space where the Dark Matter candidate is mostly a gauge singlet. We present a complete calculation of its relic abundance and find preferred masses between 500 GeV to a few TeV. Direct Dark Matter detection already probes part of the parameter space, ruling out masses above 1 TeV, while Indirect Detection is relevant only if non-thermal production is assumed. The prospects for detection of the odd composite scalars at the LHC are also established.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations68
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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