Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 m H ∝ v 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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.003 |
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".