MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115985389 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.115002

Cosmological and astrophysical probes of dark baryons

2021· article· en· W3115985389 on OpenAlexafffund
David McKeen, Maxim Pospelov, Nirmal Raj

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTRIUMFU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsBaryonParticle physicsBaryonic dark matterDark matterBig Bang nucleosynthesisAstrophysicsCosmic microwave backgroundNucleosynthesisDark fluidCosmologyDark energySupernova

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the cosmological and astrophysical signatures of a ``dark baryon,'' a neutral fermion that mixes with the neutron. As the mixing is through a higher-dimensional operator at the quark level, production of the dark baryon at high energies is enhanced so that its abundance in the early universe may be significant. Treating its initial abundance as a free parameter, we derive new, powerful limits on the properties of the dark baryon. Primordial nucleosynthesis and the cosmic microwave background provide strong constraints due to the interconversion of neutrons to dark baryons through their induced transition dipole, and due to late decays of the dark baryon. Additionally, neutrons in a neutron star could decay slowly to dark baryons, providing a novel source of heat that is constrained by measurements of pulsar temperatures. Taking all the constraints into account, we identify parameter space where the dark baryon can be a viable dark matter candidate and discuss promising avenues for probing it.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.381 · 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

Citations35
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207