Lorentz violation, gravitoelectromagnetic field and Bhabha scattering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lorentz symmetry is a fundamental symmetry in the Standard Model (SM) and in General Relativity (GR). This symmetry holds true for all models at low energies. However, at energies near the Planck scale, it is conjectured that there may be a very small violation of Lorentz symmetry. The Standard Model Extension (SME) is a quantum field theory that includes a systematic description of Lorentz symmetry violations in all sectors of particle physics and gravity. In this paper, SME is considered to study the physical process of Bhabha Scattering in the Gravitoelectromagnetism (GEM) theory. GEM is an important formalism that is valid in a suitable approximation of general relativity. A new nonminimal coupling term that violates Lorentz symmetry is used in this paper. Differential cross-section for gravitational Bhabha scattering is calculated. The Lorentz violation contributions to this GEM scattering cross-section are small and are similar in magnitude to the case of the electromagnetic field.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".