MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389135827 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.095049

Ultraheavy FIMP dark matter and conformal sectors

2023· article· en· W4389135827 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ameen Ismail

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsParticle physicsDark matterScalar (mathematics)Electroweak scaleHierarchy problemPhysics beyond the Standard ModelStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Scalar fieldTheoretical physicsElectroweak interactionMathematical physicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We point out a dark matter candidate that arises in a minimal extension of solutions to the hierarchy problem based on compositeness. In such models, some or all of the Standard Model fields are composites of a conformal field theory (CFT), which confines near the electroweak scale. We posit an elementary scalar field, whose mass is expected to lie near the cutoff of the CFT and whose couplings to the Standard Model are suppressed by the cutoff. Hence, it can naturally be ultraheavy and feebly coupled. This scalar can constitute all of the dark matter for masses between ${10}^{10}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$ and ${10}^{18}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$, with the relic abundance produced by the freeze-in mechanism via a coupling to the CFT. The principal experimental constraints come from bounds on the tensor-to-scalar ratio. We speculate about future detection prospects.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena→French-language works237,207→