MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237797956 · doi:10.22323/1.282.0344

The fate of the Higgs Vacuum

2017· article· en· W4237797956 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of 38th International Conference on High Energy Physics — PoS(ICHEP2016) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsFalse vacuumHiggs bosonPhysicsMetastabilityNucleationVacuum stateParticle physicsQuantum tunnellingBlack hole (networking)Work (physics)Theoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This talk reviews our recent work showing how tiny black holes can act as nucleation sites for the decay of the metastable Higgs vacuum \cite{GMW,BGM1,BGM2,BGM3}. We start by discussing the formation of thin wall bubbles of true vacuum inside a false vacuum, and show how adding a black hole lowers the action of the Euclidean tunneling solution, thus strongly enhancing the probability of vacuum decay. We then review numerical results for the Higgs vacuum showing that the decay rate is even higher for these "thick wall'' bubbles. The results imply either tiny black holes are not a component of our universe, or BSM corrections to the Higgs potential must stabilise our vacuum.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · 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