MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390739405 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/01/021

How effective is N <sub>eff</sub> at discovering dark radiation in a cosmology with heavy particle decay?

2024· article· en· W4390739405 on OpenAlexaff
Katarina Bleau, Joseph Bramante, Christopher V. Cappiello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research InstituteQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Particle physicsGravitinoNeutrinoCosmologyParticle (ecology)Physics beyond the Standard ModelNuclear physicsAstrophysicsSupersymmetry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Any light relic which was in thermal equilibrium with the Standard Model before it freezes out results in a shift in the effective number of neutrino species, N eff . This quantity is being measured with increasing precision, and planned experiments would seemingly rule out light particles beyond the Standard Model, even for rather high temperature light particle freeze out. Here we explore how these bounds are loosened if the energy density of the light particles is diluted with respect to that of Standard Model radiation. This can happen if a heavy particle that is decoupled from the Standard Model decays into the Standard Model bath after the light particle freezes out. After calculating how heavy state decays alter N eff for light particles beyond the Standard Model, we focus in particular on the case that the heavy decaying particle is a gravitino, and use current bounds on N eff to place constraints on the gravitino mass and the branching ratio into light particles for different values of the reheating temperature of the Universe.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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