MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404484980 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.106011

Swampland conjectures constraints on dark energy from a highly curved field space

2024· article· en· W4404484980 on OpenAlexafffund
Guillaume Payeur, Evan McDonough, Robert Brandenberger

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDark energySpace (punctuation)Field (mathematics)PhysicsTheoretical physicsComputer scienceGeometryMathematicsAstronomyPure mathematicsCosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the interplay of the trans-Planckian censorship conjecture (TCC) and the swampland distance conjecture (SDC) in the context of multifield dark energy in a curved field space. In this scenario, the phase of accelerated expansion is realized as nongeodesic motion in a highly curved field space, reminiscent of models developed in the context of inflation. The model features a stable attractor solution with near constant equation of state w ≃ − 1 , and predicts that the current era of accelerated expansion is eternal. The latter implies an eventual conflict with the TCC, which holds that the duration of any epoch of cosmic acceleration is bounded by the requirement that the large-scale observable universe is blind to Planck-scale early universe physics. This tension can be resolved by an interplay with the distance conjecture: for suitable parameter values, the apparent violation of the TCC occurs well after the fields have traversed a Planckian distance. The SDC then predicts a breakdown of the effective field theory before the TCC can be violated. We derive the constraints on the model arising from the SDC + TCC and the de Sitter conjecture. We demonstrate that the model can be consistent with both swampland conjectures and observational data from Planck 2018 and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument. 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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