Bulk Stabilization, the Extra-Dimensional Higgs Portal and Missing Energy in Higgs Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To solve the hierarchy problem, extra-dimensional models must explain why the new dimensions stabilize to the right size, and the known mechanisms for doing so require bulk scalars that couple to the branes. Because of these couplings the energetics of dimensional stabilization competes with the energetics of the Higgs vacuum, with potentially observable effects. These effects are particularly strong for one or two extra dimensions because the bulk-Higgs couplings can then be super-renormalizable or dimensionless. Experimental reach for such extra-dimensional Higgs 'portals' are stronger than for gravitational couplings because they are less suppressed at low-energies. We compute how Higgs-bulk coupling through such a portal with two extra dimensions back-reacts onto properties of the Higgs boson. When the KK mass is smaller than the Higgs mass, mixing with KK modes results in an invisible Higgs decay width, missing-energy signals at high-energy colliders, and new mechanisms of energy loss in stars and supernovae. Astrophysical bounds turn out to be complementary to collider measurements, with observable LHC signals allowed by existing constraints. We comment on the changes to the Higgs mass-coupling relationship caused by Higgs-bulk mixing, and how the resulting modifications to the running of Higgs couplings alter vacuum-stability and triviality bounds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".