MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Discovery and Spectroscopy of Dark Matter and Dark Sectors with Microscopic Black Holes at Next Generation Colliders

2020· article· en· W3004870058 on OpenAlexafffund
Ningqiang Song, Aaron C. Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research InstitutePerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and TradeMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoCanada Foundation for InnovationGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsHawking radiationDark matterMicro black holePrimordial black holeParticle physicsBlack hole (networking)Coupling (piping)Virtual black holePlanckAstrophysicsBinary black holeGravitational wave

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If the length scale of possible extra dimensions is large enough, the effective Planck scale is lowered such that microscopic black holes could be produced in collisions of high-energy particles at colliders. These black holes evaporate through Hawking radiation of a handful of energetic particles drawn from the set of all kinematically and thermally allowed degrees of freedom, including dark matter. Here, we perform the first numerical black hole spectroscopic study of the dark sector. We find that if the next generation of colliders can produce microscopic black holes, then missing momentum signatures can reveal the existence of any new light (≲10 TeV) particle, regardless of the strength of its coupling to the standard model, even if there exists no such nongravitational coupling at all.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→