MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393977940 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.083503

Stringy spacetime uncertainty principle and a modified trans-Planckian censorship criterion

2024· article· en· W4393977940 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert Brandenberger, Pei-Ming Ho, H. Kawai, Wei-Hsiang Shao

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Taiwan UniversityMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCanada Research ChairsMcGill University
KeywordsSpacetimeTheoretical physicsCosmic censorship hypothesisClassical mechanicsPhysicsMathematical physicsPhilosophyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the implications of the stringy spacetime uncertainty relation (STUR) for inflationary cosmology. By demanding that no fluctuation modes that exit the Hubble radius are affected by the nonlocality resulting from the STUR, we find an upper bound on the number of e-foldings of inflation. The bound is a factor of 2 weaker than what results from the trans-Planckian censorship criterion (TCC). By demanding that the inflationary phase is simultaneously consistent with STUR and sufficiently long for inflation to provide a causal explanation of structure on the scale of the current Hubble radius, we find an upper bound on the energy scale of inflation. The bound is less restrictive than what follows from the TCC, but it remains in conflict with canonical single-field inflation models. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.412 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207