MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921256493 · doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ab5138

Hierarchy and decoupling

2019· article· en· W2921256493 on OpenAlexaff
Matěj Hudec, Michal Malinský

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics G Nuclear and Particle Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersGrantová Agentura České RepublikyUniverzita Karlova v Praze
KeywordsHiggs bosonElectroweak interactionHierarchy problemDecoupling (probability)PhysicsSupersymmetryTheoretical physicsParticle physicsHierarchyPhysics beyond the Standard ModelScale (ratio)Electroweak scaleMiracleQuantum mechanicsPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A large hierarchy between the electroweak scale and virtually any new scale of beyond-Standard-Model physics is often claimed to be unnatural. Sometimes, the apparent disparity between the measured Higgs mass and the size of the typical loop corrections encountered within such schemes is even interpreted as a profound indication that one should expect a remedy just behind the corner, probably in the form of a new physics such as low-scale supersymmetry, new strong dynamics etc. Without much of an aspiration to shed more light on the smallness of the electroweak scale we exploit the symmetry properties of the Coleman–Weinberg effective potential to make it very clear why <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>m</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi mathvariant="italic">H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mspace width="0.25em"/> <mml:mo>∝</mml:mo> <mml:mspace width="0.25em"/> <mml:mi>v</mml:mi> </mml:math> to all orders in the perturbative expansion. With the method we present no inspection of the explicit form of the tadpole equations is required. These findings are exemplified on an extended series of specific simplified models in which the role of the heavy dynamics is played by all ‘reasonable’ types of fields (barring gravity), i.e. by a heavy scalar, a heavy (Majorana) fermion and a heavy vector. We show that the explicit dependence of m H on the heavy scale follows the expectation based on dynamical arguments such as the decoupling theorem.

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 score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics G Nuclear and Particle PhysicsSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207