MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997266376 · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/ab1f55

Review of cosmic phase transitions: their significance and experimental signatures

2019· article· en· W2997266376 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueReports on Progress in Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekAspen Center for PhysicsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCosmic stringElectroweak interactionCosmologyInflation (cosmology)ObservableCOSMIC cancer databaseContext (archaeology)UniverseElectroweak scalePhase transition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of cosmic phase transitions are of central interest in modern cosmology. In the standard model of cosmology the Universe begins in a very hot state, right after at the end of inflation via the process of reheating/preheating, and cools to its present temperature as the Universe expands. Both new and existing physics at any scale can be responsible for catalyzing either first, second or cross over phase transition, which could be either thermal or non-thermal with a potential observable imprints. Thus this field prompts a rich dialogue between gravity, particle physics and cosmology. It is all but certain that at least two cosmic phase transitions have occurred-the electroweak and the QCD phase transitions. The focus of this review will be primarily on phase transitions above such scales, We review different types of phase transitions that can appear in our cosmic history, and their applications and experimental signatures in particular in the context of exciting gravitational waves, which could be potentially be constrained by LIGO/VIRGO, Kagra, LISA, and Decigo.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations204
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReports on Progress in PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207