MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7099284818

Preprint typeset in JHEP style- HYPER VERSION McGill-03/13 Decoupling, Trans-Planckia and Inflation ∗

2003· article· en· W7099284818 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCMB cold spotCosmic microwave backgroundPhysics beyond the Standard ModelInflation (cosmology)ObservablePreprintContext (archaeology)Cosmic background radiationString theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: We survey recent calculations probing what constraints decoupling can put on the influence of very-high-energy physics on the predictions of inflation for the cosmic microwave background. Using garden-variety hybrid inflation models we identify two ways in which higher-energy physics can intrude into inflationary predictions. 1. Non-adiabatic physics up to 30 e-foldings before horizon exit can have observable consequences for the CMB, including the introduction of features in the fluctuation spectrum at specific multipoles and a general suppression of power at large scales (a prediction which was made before the recent release of WMAP results). Our comparison of simple models with the data marginally improves the goodness of fit compared to the standard concordance cosmology, but only at the 1.5-sigma level. 2. Adiabatic physics can also affect inflationary predictions through virtual loops of very-heavy particles, but these can only be distinguished from lower-energy effects within the context of specific models. We believe our conclusions should apply equally well to trans-Planckian physics provided only that this physics satisfies decoupling, such as string theory appears to do. (Non-decoupling trans-Planckian proposals must explain why meaningful theoretical predictions at low energies are possible

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1330.018

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research→French-language works237,207→