MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893703364 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.115005

Dynamical Dark Matter, MATHUSLA, and the lifetime frontier

2018· article· en· W2893703364 on OpenAlexafffund
David Curtin, Keith R. Dienes, Brooks Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDark matterPhysicsLarge Hadron ColliderParticle physicsParameter spaceFrontierHadronRange (aeronautics)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MATHUSLA is a proposed surface detector at CERN that would be able to observe the decays of nonhadronic electrically neutral long-lived particles (LLPs) with almost no background or trigger limitations. This would allow MATHUSLA to probe sub-GeV to TeV masses and lifetimes up to $c\ensuremath{\tau}\ensuremath{\sim}{10}^{7}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{m}$. MATHUSLA can play an important role in probing dark-matter scenarios involving extended hidden sectors, where additional dark states often manifest as LLPs. A prime example of such a scenario is furnished by the Dynamical Dark Matter (DDM) framework, which intrinsically gives rise to large ensembles of dark states exhibiting a broad range of masses and lifetimes. In this paper, we examine the extent to which MATHUSLA can probe the DDM parameter space, and we demonstrate that MATHUSLA may be capable of providing direct confirmation of certain unique aspects of the DDM framework which might be difficult to probe in other ways.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicDark Matter and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207