MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402359510 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.l061302

Natural inflation with exponentially small tensor-to-scalar ratio

2024· article· en· W4402359510 on OpenAlexafffund
Dario L. Lorenzoni, David Kaiser, Evan McDonough

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsExponential growthScalar (mathematics)Tensor (intrinsic definition)Inflation (cosmology)MathematicsMathematical physicsPhysicsPure mathematicsTheoretical physicsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate that ``natural inflation,'' also known as ``axion inflation,'' can be compatible with Planck 2018 measurements of the cosmic microwave background while predicting an exponentially small tensor-to-scalar ratio, e.g., $r\ensuremath{\sim}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}15}$. The strong suppression of $r$ arises from dynamics of the radial component of the complex scalar field, whose phase is the axion. Such tiny values of $r$ remain well below the threshold for detection by CMB-S4 or Simons Observatory B-mode searches. The model is testable with the running ${\ensuremath{\alpha}}_{s}$ of the spectral index, which is within reach of next-generation cosmic microwave background and large-scale structure experiments, motivating the running as a primary science goal for future experiments.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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