MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389190313 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.103546

Preheating and reheating effects of the Kähler moduli inflation I model

2023· article· en· W4389190313 on OpenAlexafffund
Islam Khan, Aaron C. Vincent, Guy Worthey

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityPerimeter InstituteArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueCanada Foundation for InnovationInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaWashington State University
KeywordsPhysicsInflatonParticle physicsEnergy (signal processing)ModuliMathematical physicsInflation (cosmology)Quantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate reheating in the string-theory-motivated K\"ahler moduli inflation I potential, coupled to a light scalar field $\ensuremath{\chi}$ and produce constraints and forecasts based on cosmic microwave background and gravitational wave observables. We implement a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling method to compute the adopted model's parameter ranges allowed by the current cosmic microwave background observations. Floquet analysis and numerical lattice simulations are performed to analyze the nonlinear effects of the model's (p)reheating phase. We derive bounds on the $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}$-cold dark matter parameters ${A}_{s}$, ${n}_{s}$, ${n}_{\mathrm{run}}$, and $r$ based on Planck results, finding that correlations between model parameters severely constrain the range of these parameters allowed within this model. While the K\"ahler moduli inflation I potential's nonvanishing minimum may provide a possible source for the observed dark energy density ${\ensuremath{\rho}}_{\mathrm{DE}}$ this cannot be tested with current observations. We estimate the 95% CI bounds on the inflaton mass ${m}_{\ensuremath{\phi}}$ and reheating temperature ${T}_{\mathrm{reh}}$ to be $2.1\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{13}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}\ensuremath{\lesssim}{m}_{\ensuremath{\phi}}\ensuremath{\lesssim}3.2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{13}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$ and ${T}_{\mathrm{reh}}\ensuremath{\gtrsim}1.8\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{3}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$, respectively. We observe both self-resonance and parametric resonance instability band structures in our Floquet analysis results. Finally, we do not observe any formation of oscillon configurations in our lattice simulations; however, our results predict a stochastic gravitational wave background generated during preheating that would be observable today in the ${10}^{9}--{10}^{11}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{Hz}$ frequency range.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.395
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→