MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978654346 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.123511

Higher <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math>-point function data analysis techniques for heavy particle production and WMAP results

2019· article· en· W2978654346 on OpenAlexafffund
Moritz Münchmeyer, Kendrick M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersUniversity of TorontoIndustry CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceGovernment of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaStanford University
KeywordsEstimatorPhysicsCMB cold spotCurvaturePoint processFunction (biology)AlgorithmStatistical physicsMathematicsStatisticsQuantum mechanicsGeometryCosmic microwave background

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore data analysis techniques for signatures from heavy particle production during inflation. Heavy particules can be produced by time dependent masses and couplings, which are ubiquitous in string theory. These localized excitations induce curvature perturbations with nonzero correlation functions at all orders. In particular, Flauger et al. [J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2017) 058] have shown that the signal to noise as a function of the order $N$ of the correlation function can peak for $N$ of order $\mathcal{O}(1)$ to $\mathcal{O}(100)$ for an interesting space of models. As previous non-Gaussianity analyses have focused on $N={3,4}$, in principle this provides an unexplored data analysis window with new discovery potential. We derive estimators for arbitrary $N$-point functions in this model and discuss their properties and covariances. To lowest order, the heavy particle production phenomenology reduces to a classical Poisson process, which can be implemented as a search for spherically symmetric profiles in the curvature perturbations. We explicitly show how to recover this result from the $N$-point functions and their estimators. Our focus in this paper is on method development, but we provide an initial data analysis using WMAP data, which illustrates the particularities of higher $N$-point function searches.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1000.043

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations30
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207