EFT of interacting spin-2 fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We consider the effective field theory of multiple interacting massive spin-2 fields. We focus on the case where the interactions are chosen so that the cutoff is the highest possible, and highlight two distinct classes of theories. In the first class, the mass eigenstates only interact through potential operators that carry no derivatives in unitary gauge at leading order. In the second class, a specific kinetic mixing between the mass eigenstates is included non-linearly. Performing a decoupling and ADM analysis, we point out the existence of a ghost present at a low scale for the first class of interactions. For the second class of interactions where kinetic mixing is included, we derive the full Λ3-decoupling limit and confirm the absence of any ghosts. Nevertheless both formulations can be used to consistently describe an EFT of interacting massive spin-2 fields which, for a suitable technically natural tuning of the EFT, have the same strong coupling scale Λ3. We identify the generic form of EFT corrections in each case. By using Galileon Duality transformations for the specific case of two massive spin-2 fields with suitable couplings, the decoupling limit theory is shown to be a bi-Galileon.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".