Constraining the evaporation rate of Primordial black holes using archival data from VERITAS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it