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 OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

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