Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Why the Cosmological Constant Problem is Hard

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 8 Jun 2000

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim This phenomenon appears to be responsible for the fact that bulk supersymmetry does not actually protect the brane cosmological constant.

how it is stated · hedged possibility 0.87 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDhep-th/0006059 (version 3)
Pith IDJNCOQ7WI, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationZurab Kakushadze. "Why the Cosmological Constant Problem is Hard." arXiv:hep-th/0006059 (2000). https://pith.science/paper/JNCOQ7WI
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 6,762 input tokens, $0.0003 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.53 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.44 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v3. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We consider a recent proposal to solve the cosmological constant problem within the context of brane world scenarios with infinite volume extra dimensions. In such theories bulk can be supersymmetric even if brane supersymmetry is completely broken. The bulk cosmological constant can therefore naturally be zero. Since the volume of the extra dimensions is infinite, it might appear that at large distances one would measure the bulk cosmological constant which vanishes. We point out a caveat in this argument. In particular, we use a concrete model, which is a generalization of the Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati model, to argue that in the presence of non-zero brane cosmological constant at large distances such a theory might become effectively four dimensional. This is due to a mass gap in the spectrum of bulk graviton modes. In fact, the corresponding distance scale is set precisely by the brane cosmological constant. This phenomenon appears to be responsible for the fact that bulk supersymmetry does not actually protect the brane cosmological constant.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We consider a recent proposal to solve the cosmological constant problem within the context of brane world scenarios with infinite volume extra dimensions. background 0.84 0.30 0.03 asserted 0.60
s1 In such theories bulk can be supersymmetric even if brane supersymmetry is completely broken. background 0.95 0.12 0.03 asserted 0.74
s2 The bulk cosmological constant can therefore naturally be zero. background 0.89 0.11 0.04 asserted 0.75
s3 Since the volume of the extra dimensions is infinite, it might appear that at large distances one would measure the bulk cosmological constant which vanishes. background 0.99 0.06 0.03 speculative 0.75
s4 We point out a caveat in this argument. contribution 0.53 0.69 0.05 asserted 0.79
s5 In particular, we use a concrete model, which is a generalization of the Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati model, to argue that in the presence of non-zero brane cosmological constant at large distances such a theory might become effectively four dimensional. contribution 0.55 0.85 0.36 hedged possibility 0.57
s6 This is due to a mass gap in the spectrum of bulk graviton modes. result 0.55 0.69 0.08 asserted 1.00
s7 In fact, the corresponding distance scale is set precisely by the brane cosmological constant. result 0.84 0.72 0.09 asserted 1.00
s8 This phenomenon appears to be responsible for the fact that bulk supersymmetry does not actually protect the brane cosmological constant. interpretation 0.94 0.69 0.81 hedged possibility 0.87

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.53 · evidence from argument 0.51.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v3
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We consider a recent proposal to solve the cosmological constant problem within the context of brane world scenarios with infinite volume extra dimensions. In such theories bulk can be supersymmetric even if brane supersymmetry is completely broken. The bulk cosmological constant can therefore naturally be zero. Since the volume of the extra dimensions is infinite, it might appear that at large distances one would measure the bulk cosmological constant which vanishes. We point out a caveat in this argument. In particular, we use a concrete model, which is a generalization of the Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati model, to argue that in the presence of non-zero brane cosmological constant at large distances such a theory might become effectively four dimensional. This is due to a mass gap in the spectrum of bulk graviton modes. In fact, the corresponding distance scale is set precisely by the brane cosmological constant. This phenomenon appears to be responsible for the fact that bulk supersymmetry does not actually protect the brane cosmological constant.

Human review
References
How the literature uses it

Papers whose main result relates to this one's

How each label was checked · JSON

Found among the papers closest to this one by title and main claim. Pith's classifier compared each pair's main results and a second model family confirmed the relation; checked against two further families, shown conflicts agreed 118 times in 120 and shown same results 218 times in 239. The quoted sentence is the other paper's main claim.

States a conflicting result 1 paper

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.