Testing gravitational wave propagation with multiband detections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Effective field theories (EFT) of dark energy (DE) — built to parameterise the properties of DE in an agnostic manner — are severely constrained by measurements of the propagation speed of gravitational waves (GW). However, GW frequencies probed by ground-based interferometers lie around the typical strong coupling scale of the EFT, and it is likely that the effective description breaks down before even reaching that scale. We discuss how this leaves the possibility that an appropriate ultraviolet completion of DE scenarios, valid at scales beyond an EFT description, can avoid present constraints on the GW speed. Instead, additional constraints in the lower frequency LISA band would be harder to escape, since the energies involved are orders of magnitude lower. By implementing a method based on GW multiband detections, we show indeed that a single joint observation of a GW150914-like event by LISA and a terrestrial interferometer would allow one to constrain the speed of light and gravitons to match to within 10 -15 . Multiband GW observations can therefore firmly constrain scenarios based on the EFT of DE, in a robust and unambiguous way.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".