MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413466968 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.112.035023

Plausible constraints and inflationary production for dark photons

2025· article· en· W4413466968 on OpenAlexafffund
James M. Cline, Gonzalo Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCERNU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsProduction (economics)PhotonPhysicsDark photonDark matterParticle physicsEconomicsOpticsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generic constraints on dark photons are generally presented assuming they have Stueckelberg masses. These constraints are strengthened if instead the mass is due to the Higgs mechanism and the dark Higgs is light. First, we show that under reasonable assumptions on the origin of kinetic mixing ε and perturbativity, the strengthened constraints on ε cannot be arbitrarily relaxed by making the Higgs heavy. Second, we demonstrate a simple mechanism for generating dark photon dark matter after inflation, where fluctuations of a dark Higgs by stochastic misalignment can produce stable dark photons through h → A ′ A ′ decay. Third, we point out new bounds on ε in the case where the dark photon mediates thermal freeze-out of light dark matter by s -channel exchange, taking account of generic expectations for the size of ε , and astrophysical upper bounds on the self-interaction cross section.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.380 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicDark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena→French-language works237,207→