MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392591575 · doi:10.1007/jhep03(2024)043

Confinement from distance in metric space and its relation to cosmological constant

2024· article· en· W4392591575 on OpenAlexafffund
Amineh Mohseni, Mahdi Torabian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueCERN
KeywordsPhysicsCosmological constantMetric (unit)Theoretical physicsConstant (computer programming)Space (punctuation)Relation (database)Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metricQuintessenceStatistical physicsMathematical physicsCosmologyQuantum mechanicsDark energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract We argue that, in a theory of quantum gravity, the gauge coupling and the confinement scale of a gauge theory are related to distance in the space of metric configurations, and in turn to the cosmological constant. To support the argument, we compute the gauge kinetic functions in variuos supersymmetric Heterotic and type II string compactifications and show that they depend on distance. According to the swampland program, the distance between two (anti) de Sitter vacua in the space of metric configurations is proportional to the logarithm of the ratio of cosmological constants and thus the confinement scale depends on the value of the cosmological constant. In this framework, for de Sitter space, we revisit the swampland Festina Lente bound and gauge theories in the dark dimension scenario. We show that if the Festina Lente bound is realized in a de Sitter vacuum and dependence on distance is strong enough, it will be realized in vacua with higher cosmological constants. In dark dimension scenario, as the value of cosmological constant is related to the decompactifying dimension, we find that the confinement scale is indeed related to radius of dark dimension. We show that in this scenario the Festina Lente bound holds for the standard model QCD, as well as all confining gauge groups with N c ≲ 10 3 .

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→