MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955332389 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.035011

Gravitational wave and collider searches for electroweak symmetry breaking patterns

2020· article· en· W2955332389 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsElectroweak interactionSymmetry breakingColliderHiggs bosonStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Spontaneous symmetry breakingTechnicolorGravitational wave

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Utilizing the Georgi-Machacek model, we study the electroweak symmetry breaking mechanism with extra electroweak symmetry breaking contributions (eEWSB) that are bounded by the Fermi constant and limits from the related collider searches. The eEWSB is helpful to build a different zero temperature vacuum structure from the Standard Model (SM), and therefore leads to different electroweak phase transition patterns at the early Universe. We investigate the collider search prospects and gravitational waves (GW) predictions from the strongly firstly order phase transition (SFOEWPT) in this scenario. The Higgs pair searches at lepton colliders are found to be complementary with the GW searches of the SFOEWPT parameter spaces.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.386 · 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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207