Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Planck or the quantum gravity (QG) scale, being 16 orders of magnitude greater than the electroweak scale, is often considered inaccessible by current experimental techniques. However, it was shown recently by one of the current authors that QG effects via the generalized uncertainty principle affects the time required for free wavepackets to double their size, and this difference in time is at or near current experimental accuracies (Villalpando C and Modak S K 2019 Class. Quantum Grav. 36 215016 ; Villalpando C and Modak S K 2019 Phys. Rev. D 100 024054 ). In this work, we make an important improvement over the earlier study, by taking into account the leading order relativistic correction, which naturally appears in the systems under consideration, due to the significant mean velocity of the travelling wavepackets. Our analysis shows that although the relativistic correction adds nontrivial modifications to the results of (Villalpando and Modak 2019 Class. Quantum Grav. 36 215016 ; Villalpando and Modak 2019 Phys. Rev. D 100 024054 ), the earlier claims remain intact and are in fact strengthened. We explore the potential for these results being tested in the laboratory.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".