MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3101390358

Warped Radion Inflation

2016· article· en· W3101390358 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Trudeau, James M. Cline

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflatonPhysicsBraneDilatonBrane cosmologyExtra dimensionsRandall–Sundrum modelScalar (mathematics)CovarianceString theoryTheoretical physicsMathematical physicsInflation (cosmology)Particle physicsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that the radion in a warped geometry bounded by two branes can have a potential suitable for inflation. Our construction is based upon a solution known in string theory as the linear dilaton, in which the back-reaction from a bulk scalar \Phi is exactly accounted for. The radion, stabilized by \Phi, is much heavier than the TeV scale and its couplings to the standard model are much more suppressed than in the usual Randall-Sundrum solution. We present a new formalism for obtaining approximate time-dependent solutions, based on perturbing the exact solution to the coupled Einstein and scalar field equations in the bulk. It allows the radion potential to be computed directly in terms of the brane potentials for \Phi. We show that simple exponential potentials on the branes can lead to a 4D radion potential with a flattened hilltop form, yielding inflation with a spectral index of typically n_s=0.96 and no higher than 0.99. With more complicated brane potentials, the descent from the hilltop can be a linear potential, giving a tensor-to-scalar ratio as large as r=0.07 with n_s=0.974. The couplings of the radion to the standard model particles are dictated by general covariance, so the details of reheating are explicitly calculable, leading to a reheat temperature of at least 10^7 GeV. The quantum corrections to the inflaton potential from its couplings to matter are also calculable and are shown to be small, so that the prediction for the shape of the potential is under theoretical control, even with superPlanckian field excursions.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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