MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962823738 · doi:10.22323/1.358.0719

Constraining the evaporation rate of Primordial black holes using archival data from VERITAS

2019· article· en· W2962823738 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of 36th International Cosmic Ray Conference — PoS(ICRC2019) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Energy Research Scientific Computing CenterU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of ScienceSmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsPrimordial black holeAstrophysicsObservatoryGamma rayEvaporationUniverseAstronomyMeteorologyBinary black hole

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primordial black holes (PBHs) are thought to have been formed as a result of density fluctuations in the very early Universe. It is suggested that PBHs of mass $\sim 5 \times 10^{14} \mathrm{\ g}$ or less have evaporated through the release of Hawking radiation by the present day. However, PBHs of initial mass $10^{15} \mathrm{\ g}$ should still be evaporating at the present epoch. Over the past few years, very high-energy (VHE; E $>$ 100 GeV) gamma-ray emission from PBHs in the form of a burst has been searched for using ground-based gamma-ray instruments. However, no observational evidence has been reported on the detection of VHE emission from PBHs yet. Previously, an upper limit on the rate density of PBHs was calculated using 750 hours of archival data taken between 2009 and 2012 by the VERITAS gamma-ray observatory. We will augment this study with additional data taken between 2012 and 2017. In addition to more data, the lower energy threshold on the newer data will help to produce an improved upper limit on the rate at which PBHs are evaporating in our local neighborhood. This work is still in progress, therefore we will only report an expected change to the upper limit on the rate density of PBH evaporation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of 36th International Cosmic Ray Conference — PoS(ICRC2019)Same topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207