Approaches to photon absorption in a Lorentz invariance violation scenario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Very high-energy astrophysical gamma rays suffer a suppression of their flux along their propagation due to their interaction, through the <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <a:mi>γ</a:mi> <a:mi>γ</a:mi> <a:mo stretchy="false">→</a:mo> <a:msup> <a:mi>e</a:mi> <a:mo>+</a:mo> </a:msup> <a:msup> <a:mi>e</a:mi> <a:mo>−</a:mo> </a:msup> </a:math> pair-production process, with the soft photon backgrounds present in the Universe. We examine the Universe’s transparency to gamma rays within a Lorentz invariance violation (LIV) framework, focusing on photon subluminal quadratic corrections driven by a high-energy scale. Based on an explicit calculation, we provide a new expression for the cross section that overcomes the limitations of previous approaches and refines existing constraints for the LIV scale, while we introduce a new approximation that may be useful in LIV scenarios beyond effective field theory. These improvements appear essential for setting constraints on LIV effects with future observations at ultrahigh energies, where previous approximations may fall short. 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 teacher head, 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".