MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388487723 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/11/019

Superstring cosmology — a complementary review

2023· review· en· W4388487723 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Brandenberger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSuperstring theoryCosmologyTheoretical physicsNon-standard cosmologyString cosmologyInflation (cosmology)String phenomenologyString (physics)UniverseString theoryQuantum cosmologyPhysical cosmologyRelationship between string theory and quantum field theorySupersymmetryParticle physicsDark energyAstrophysicsQuantum gravityQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this review, a number of approaches to superstring cosmology which make use of key features which distinguish string theory from point particle theories are discussed, with particular emphasis on emergent scenarios. One motivation for the discussion is the realization that, in order to describe the evolution of the very early universe, it is necessary to go beyond a conventional effective field theory (EFT) analysis. Some of the conceptual problems of an EFT analysis will be discussed. The review begins with a summary of the criteria for a successful early universe scenario, emphasizing that cosmic inflation is not the only scenario of early universe cosmology which is consistent with current cosmological observations. Bouncing and emergent scenarios as interesting alternatives are introduced. Some realizations of these scenarios from superstring theory are reviewed, e.g. String Gas Cosmology, the Pre-Big-Bang scenario, the Ekpyrotic model, Double Field Theory cosmology and matrix model cosmology. In light of the difficulties in obtaining cosmic inflation from string theory (at the level of EFT), and realizing that there are promising examples of alternative early universe scenarios which are derived from basic principles of superstring theory, one must entertain the possibility that the cosmology emerging from string theory will not involve an extended period of accelerated expansion.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207