MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W825013213 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.035012

Electroweak baryogenesis from exotic electroweak symmetry breaking

2015· article· en· W825013213 on OpenAlexafffund
Nikita Blinov, Jonathan Kozaczuk, David E. Morrissey, Carlos Tamarit

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaTRIUMF
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónGovernment of Canada
KeywordsBaryogenesisElectroweak interactionParticle physicsSymmetry breakingTechnicolorPhysicsGauge boson

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate scenarios in which electroweak baryogenesis can occur during an exotic stage of electroweak symmetry breaking in the early Universe. This transition is driven by the expectation value of a new electroweak scalar instead of the standard Higgs field. A later, second transition then takes the system to the usual electroweak minimum, dominated by the Higgs boson, while preserving the baryon asymmetry created in the first transition. We discuss the general requirements for such a two-stage electroweak transition to be suitable for electroweak baryogenesis and present a toy model that illustrates the necessary ingredients. We then apply these results to construct an explicit realization of this scenario within the inert two Higgs doublet model. Despite decoupling the Higgs from the symmetry-breaking transition required for electroweak baryogenesis, we find that this picture generically predicts new light states that are accessible experimentally.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations116
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D, Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmologySame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207