MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407946400 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.034514

Dynamical dark energy from lattice quantum gravity

2025· article· en· W4407946400 on OpenAlexafffund
Mingwei Dai, Walter Freeman, Jack Laiho, Marc Schiffer, Judah Unmuth-Yockey

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersFermilabHigh Energy PhysicsOffice of ScienceGovernment of CanadaMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesNational Science FoundationCompute CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaHopkins Population Center, Johns Hopkins UniversityAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaSyracuse University
KeywordsDark energyPhysicsQuantumLattice (music)Quantum gravityTheoretical physicsAstrophysicsQuantum mechanicsCosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 nontrivial 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 the Standard Model of cosmology at the O ( 10 − 3 ) level in 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 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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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