MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948309864 · doi:10.1007/jhep10(2019)055

Repulsive forces and the weak gravity conjecture

2019· article· en· W2948309864 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ben Heidenreich, Matthew Reece, Tom Rudelius

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueAspen Center for PhysicsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsConjectureTheoretical physicsFalsifiabilityString theoryRange (aeronautics)Scalar (mathematics)ModuliMassless particlePhysicsQuantum gravityString (physics)QuantumMathematicsQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsGeometryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract The Weak Gravity Conjecture is a nontrivial conjecture about quantum gravity that makes sharp, falsifiable predictions which can be checked in a broad range of string theory examples. However, in the presence of massless scalar fields (moduli), there are (at least) two inequivalent forms of the conjecture, one based on charge-to-mass ratios and the other based on long-range forces. We discuss the precise formulations of these two conjectures and the evidence for them, as well as the implications for black holes and for “strong forms” of the conjectures. Based on the available evidence, it seems likely that both conjectures are true, suggesting that there is a stronger criterion which encompasses both. We discuss one possibility.

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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations102
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207