Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract Axions and axion-like particles (ALPs) are ubiquitous in popular attempts to solve supercalifragilisticexpialidocious puzzles of Nature. A widespread and vivid experimental programme spanning a vast range of mass scales and decades of couplings strives to find evidence for these elusive but theoretically well-motivated particles. In the absence of clear guiding principle, effective field theories (EFTs) prove to be an efficient tool in this experimental quest. Hilbert series technologies are a privileged instrument of the EFT toolbox to enumerate and classify operators. In this work, we compute explicitly the Hilbert series capturing the interactions of a generic ALP to the Standard Model particles above and below the electroweak symmetry scale, which allow us to build bases of operators up to dimension 8. In particular, we revealed a remarkable structure of the Hilbert series that isolates the shift-symmetry breaking and preserving interactions. In addition, with the Hilbert series method, we enumerate the sources of CP violation in terms of CP-even, CP-odd and CP-violating operators. Furthermore, we provide an supplementary file of the Hilbert series up to dimension 15 to supplement our findings, which can be used for further analysis and exploration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".