MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416412757 · doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2025.100510

Disentangling the origins of the NANOGrav signal: Early Universe models and ΔN bounds

2025· article· en· W4416412757 on OpenAlexaff
Ido Ben-Dayan, Utkarsh Kumar, Amresh Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAriel UniversityCouncil for Higher Education
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundPulsarGravitational waveMetastabilityLimit (mathematics)UniverseCurrent (fluid)Cosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate whether an Early-Universe stochastic gravitational–wave background (SGWB) can account for the common-spectrum process reported by NANOGrav, while also being consistent with current and projected CMB measurements of extra radiation. We compute the contribution of effective number of relativistic species, Δ N e f f , for a number of Early-Universe models proposed to explain the pulsar timing array (PTA) spectrum. We demonstrate that models predicting Δ N e f f above the CMB limit would either be excluded or require a significant additional contribution from other sources to explain the NANOGrav signal while remaining consistent with the CMB constraints. We find that current NANOGrav 15-year dataset, sensitive up to 60 nHz, gives a negligible contribution to Δ N e f f and remains well below the present and future CMB detection threshold. However, when we project future PTA capabilities reaching upto 1 μHz, even with our conservative estimate we find that Inflation, Scalar Induced Gravitational Waves (SIGW), and metastable cosmic strings can induce a Δ N e f f large enough for > 3.5 σ detection by the Simons Observatory.

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)0.004
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
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy AstrophysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207