Dynamical Dark Energy from Lattice Quantum Gravity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the behavior of the vacuum in Euclidean dynamical triangulations (EDT). Algorithmic improvements and better lattice spacing determinations allow us to test the properties of the emergent de Sitter geometries of our simulations to higher precision than previously possible. Although the agreement with de Sitter is good, the improved precision reveals deviations that can be interpreted as non-trivial vacuum dynamics, well-described by a cosmological constant that runs with scale. The simulations show that the dominant running is quadratic and that the scale can be identified with the Hubble rate. Several key cross-checks support this picture, including consistent results across multiple lattice spacings and the fact that the null energy condition is not violated. The parameters of the running are fully determined by simulations, enabling predictions when extrapolated to the scales relevant for our universe. This leads to a model for dark energy that is compatible with current observations, but which predicts deviations from $Λ$CDM at the ${\cal O}(10^{-3})$ level in cosmological observables that could be tested with future improvements in precision measurements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".