MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3075169288 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/01/045

Scalar-tensor cosmologies without screening

2021· article· en· W3075169288 on OpenAlexaff
Johannes Noller, Luca Santoni, Enrico Trincherini, Leonardo G. Trombetta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsScalar (mathematics)ObservableScalar–tensor theoryScalar theories of gravitationTheoretical physicsGravitational waveTensor (intrinsic definition)GravitationDark energyFifth forceDark matterClassical mechanicsLimit (mathematics)CosmologyMechanism (biology)Classical field theoryAstrophysicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scalar-tensor theories are frequently only consistent with fifth force constraints in the presence of a screening mechanism, namely in order to suppress an otherwise unacceptably large coupling between the scalar and ordinary matter. Here we investigate precisely which subsets of Horndeski theories do not give rise to and/or require such a screening mechanism. We investigate these subsets in detail, deriving their form and discussing how they are restricted upon imposing additional bounds from the speed of gravitational waves, solar system tests and cosmological observables. Finally, we also identify what subsets of scalar-tensor theories precisely recover the predictions of standard (linearised) ΛCDM cosmologies in the quasi-static limit.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207