MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6908553457 · doi:10.3204/pubdb-2019-00485

Twin Higgs model with strongly interacting massive particle dark matter

2018· article· en· W6908553457 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDESY Publication Database (PUBDB) (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsches Elektronen-SynchrotronIsraeli Centers for Research ExcellenceAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science FoundationAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungU.S. Department of EnergyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDark matterHiggs bosonHierarchy problemHierarchyStandard Model (mathematical formulation)Physics beyond the Standard ModelScale (ratio)Scalar field dark matter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hierarchy problem and the identity of dark matter are two of the central driving forces in particle physics. Twin Higgs models provide an elegant solution to the little hierarchy problem, while Strongly Interacting Massive Particles (SIMPs) provide an appealing dark matter candidate. Here we show that SIMPs can easily be embedded in the Twin Higgs setup, such that dark matter and the hierarchy problem can be addressed in a single framework. This also provides a natural explanation to the proximity between the confinement scale of SIMP dark matter and the strong scale of QCD.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDESY Publication Database (PUBDB) (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron)Same topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207