Renormalization group flow of projectable Hořava gravity in ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) dimensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report a comprehensive numerical study of the renormalization group flow of marginal couplings in ($3+1$)-dimensional projectable Ho\ifmmode \check{r}\else \v{r}\fi{}ava gravity. First, we classify all fixed points of the flow and analyze their stability matrices. We find that some of the stability matrices possess complex eigenvalues and discuss why this does not contradict unitarity. Next, we scan over the renormalization group trajectories emanating from all asymptotically free fixed points. We identify a unique fixed point giving rise to a set of trajectories spanning the whole range of the kinetic coupling $\ensuremath{\lambda}$ compatible with unitarity. This includes the region $0<\ensuremath{\lambda}\ensuremath{-}1\ensuremath{\ll}1$ assumed in previous phenomenological applications. The respective trajectories closely follow a single universal trajectory, differing only by the running of the gravitational coupling. The latter exhibits nonmonotonic behavior along the flow, vanishing both in the ultraviolet and the infrared limits. The requirement that the theory remains weakly coupled along the renormalization group trajectory implies a natural hierarchy between the scale of Lorentz invariance violation and a much larger value of the Planck mass inferred from low-energy interactions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".