dataesr/scientific-paragraphs-categorization huggingface dataset:
These solutions were obtained in  [15, 21, 22] , forming a convenient database. Their stability had only been analysed partially on a restricted set of fields denoted (ρ, τ, σ I ) in  [5] , and we comment here on the comparison to the stability properties now observed when including all the left-invariant fields. A first result is that all de Sitter and anti-de Sitter solutions at hand are found unstable, despite several candidates found stable within the restricted set of fields. This is in agreement with various conjectures, as discussed in those sections. We also discuss at length the field directions of the tachyons: it is often possible to identify a previously observed tachyon among the fields (ρ, τ, σ I ), while the new fields, e. g. RR and NSNS axions, contribute to a different one.
JHEP12(2022)026 Several questions as well as opportunities are raised after this work, having now the code MSSV available; some ideas were already mentioned in the Introduction. To start with, one may consider verifying that the truncation to left-invariant modes on group manifolds and maximally symmetric spacetimes is a consistent truncation, in full generality. By this we mean allowing for any possible D p source configuration without orientifold. Indeed, within our ansatz, compactifications with orientifolds have all been classified in  [15] , and we checked those here already. In turn, this restricts to anti-de Sitter solutions, according to Maldacena-Nuñez no-go theorem  [65] : only those do not require orientifolds. While the same procedure could be followed combining the codes MSSS and MSSV, and we expect this to work, the challenge could be on the amount of equations and variables to consider, larger in absence of orientifold projection.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT step in the series of CMB space missions, following the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)'s COBE  [32]  and WMAP  [33] , and the European Space Agency (ESA)'s Planck  [34] , each of which has made its own landmark scientific discoveries. See Ref. [2]  for a comprehensive list of CMB experiments and their pioneering contributions. The CMB polarization anisotropies can be decomposed according to their transformation properties under parity transformations into "E modes" and "B modes. " The E-mode polarization is predominantly caused by acoustic waves present at recombination, and the signal is strongest on angular scales of a few to tens of arcminutes (corresponding to multipoles of ℓ ∼ 1000). The B-mode polarization pattern imprinted by gravitational waves peaks on degree angular scales (corresponding to multipoles of ℓ ≃ 80) and on very large angular scales (corresponding to multipoles of ℓ ≲ 10)  [27, 35].
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT Even in the absence of gravitational waves, on the largest angular scales, scattering of photons during the reionization epoch at z ≃ 6-10 generates E-mode polarization  [36]. Lite-BIRD will measure this signal with high precision and will make a definitive determination of the optical depth to the surface of last scattering. The optical depth contains key information about the nature of the epoch of reionization and will, for example, constrain models of the first stars. The optical depth is currently the least well-constrained parameter of the standard cosmological model and currently limits any constraints that rely on comparisons of the amplitude of CMB anisotropies and clustering of the matter distribution, such as the measurement of the sum of neutrino masses  [41] [42] [43] [44] [45].
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT WMAP and Planck imply that the anisotropies are nearly Gaussian so that their statistical properties are predominantly characterized by the 2-point correlation functions  [55] [56] [57] [58]. The observations by WMAP and Planck also tightly constrain departures from statistical isotropy  [59] [60] [61] [62]. Under the assumption that the underlying probability distribution is isotropic, the correlations between anisotropies at different points in the sky only depend on the angle between them. Given these properties, it is natural to consider angular correlation functions that measure the correlations between different points in the sky as a function of this angular separation. While it would be possible to work with maps and their angular correlation functions, in practice it is more convenient to expand the temperature T maps in terms of spherical harmonics, ∆T (n) = ℓ,m a T ℓm Y ℓm (n) , (1) and work with the coefficients of this expansion a T ℓm , referred to as multipole coefficients.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT temperature or E-mode anisotropies are schematically given by C XX (s),ℓ = dk k ∆ 2 ζ (k) τ0 0 dτ S X (s) (k, τ ) j ℓ [k(τ 0 -τ )] 2 , ( 4 ) where k is the wave number of a Fourier mode and τ is the so-called conformal time, which is related to the physical time t as dτ = dt/a(t) with a(t) being the scale factor for the homogeneous and isotropic expansion of space. The subscript "0" indicates the present-day epoch. The integrand factorizes into three pieces: • The primordial power spectrum of density perturbations as a function of k (or equivalently radians per distance), ∆ 2 ζ (k), which contains information about the very early Universe. • The source functions, S X (s) (k, τ ), which contain information about the physics of the medium, largely from recombination to the present.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT for. As we will discuss in more detail, LiteBIRD employs 15 frequency bands to characterize and remove the foreground emission. The weak lensing signal has the same frequency dependence as the gravitational wave signal, but its angular dependence is theoretically wellunderstood. Furthermore, because the weak lensing is caused by large-scale structure along the line of sight, some of the weak lensing signal can be removed by combining LiteBIRD with other data sets  [85] [86] [87] [88] [89]. The theoretical predictions and current measurements of the angular power spectra are shown in Fig. 1. The LiteBIRD error bars, which are used for the constraints presented in the next sections, include foreground residuals as detailed in Sect. 5.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT velocity per Hubble time is small. Such models of inflation, based on a single slowly rolling scalar field, predict statistically homogeneous and isotropic, adiabatic, and nearly Gaussian primordial density perturbations with a spectrum of primordial density perturbations given by  [84]  ∆ 2 ζ (k) = 1 2ϵM 2 P H 2π 2 , ( 10 ) where the slow-roll parameter ϵ and the Hubble rate H are to be evaluated at a time when k = aH, and M P is the (reduced) Planck mass. Since both ϵ and H are slowly varying functions of time, the spectrum is expected to be nearly (but not exactly) scale invariant n s ≃ 1. Furthermore, as inflation proceeds, the Hubble rate decreases. The slow-roll parameter ϵ is small during inflation, approaches unity as inflation ends, and in the simplest models it increases monotonically.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT of a primordial gravitational wave signal would allow a determination of the expansion rate of the Universe during inflation. In single-field slow-roll models, the expansion rate is directly related to the energy scale of inflation, V ≃ 3H 2 M 2 P. These gravitational waves are a remarkable prediction of inflation, and their detection would provide strong independent evidence for inflation, arguably providing definitive confirmation. A detection of this signal would also be the first observation of quantum fluctuations of spacetime itself, and have other important implications to be discussed below.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT To explain the implications of an upper limit and to understand the motivation for the LiteBIRD design sensitivity we will require an additional concept, that of the characteristic scale of the potential  [52, 107]. To introduce this quantity and highlight its importance, we will begin with an argument that does not involve the microscopic details of a particular model of inflation. Provided the fractional rate of change of the expansion rate is small compared to the expansion rate, ϵ ≪ 1, the tensor-to-scalar ratio r obeys a simple differential equation in terms of the number of e-folds N until the end of inflation  [108] [109] [110] : d ln r dN = [n s (N ) -1] + r 8. (15) The cosmic microwave background allows us to observe a window of a few e-folds around N * , which we typically expect to be between 50 and 60.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT The "characteristic scale of the potential," M is related to the integration constant N eq according to M = N eq M P. This allows us to express the tensor-to-scalar ratio in this class of models in terms of the characteristic scale as r ≃ 0. 0025 57 N * 2 M M P 2. ( 18 ) Instantaneous reheating corresponds to N * ≃ 57. Any delay in reheating will decrease N * , and hence will increase the expected tensor-to-scalar ratio for a given characteristic scale. As a consequence, for M ≳ M P we expect r ≳ 0. 0025, so that an upper limit from LiteBIRD with r < 0. 002 at 95 % C. L. (accounting for both statistical and systematic uncertainties) would disfavor any of the simplest models of inflation with a characteristic scale of the potential larger than the Planck scale. In models such as the Starobinsky model, the Planck scale does not occur by accident, but appears because the characteristic scale and the Planck scale are set by the same dimensionful coefficient in the action, the coefficient of the Einstein-Hilbert term.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT For a given reheating history, a model makes a definitive prediction, corresponding to a point in the n s -r plane. However, since the reheating history is uncertain, we represent the predictions of models by bars corresponding to 47 < N * < 57. One exception to this general rule is the Starobinsky model. Unlike for most models, the underlying idea of this example is that inflation is a consequence of a short-distance modification of the theory of gravity rather than a consequence of the matter sector. Even though the Starobinsky model can be written as a scalar-tensor theory, like any generic f (R) theory  [123, 124] , this idea naturally predicts that the couplings to matter fields responsible for reheating are gravitational couplings in the f (R) frame. In this case, reheating is somewhat delayed.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT Among the examples given above, the Goncharov-Linde model  [121, 122]  predicts a sub-Planckian characteristic scale, and α-attractors  [93, [118] [119] [120]  with a sub-Planckian characteristic scale also exist. So a detection of primordial gravitational waves with LiteBIRD is by no means guaranteed. We thus also showcase what an upper limit would look like in Fig. 3. Let us note that in addition to being simpler in the sense that they do not contain a large hierarchy of scales, models with M ≳ M P are also simpler in a different sense. One may ask whether inflation will begin for general initial conditions for a given model, and it has recently become possible to investigate this question in numerical general relativity, assuming that the description in terms of a single scalar field is already appropriate at that time  [125] [126] [127] [128].
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT still produced quantum-mechanically). Nevertheless, such a discovery would still provide definitive evidence for inflation because we need inflation to stretch the wavelengths of gravitational waves to billions of light years. An example of a U(1) gauge field is the primordial magnetic field, which can source tensor perturbations that are non-scale-invariant, non-Gaussian, and parity-violating (see Ref. [138]  and references therein). Magnetic fields can also induce a spatially-dependent rotation of polarization angles of the CMB by means of Faraday rotation. The effect can be detected using multi-frequency data because the Faraday rotation angle is inversely proportional to the square of the frequency. We discuss this possibility further in Sect. 6. 5. The axion-SU(2) model described in Ref.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT • The absence of atmospheric emission and its large brightness fluctuations in spacebased measurements give high-fidelity maps on large angular scales corresponding to 2 ≤ ℓ ≲ 30. • Bright sources such as the Earth and Sun are kept far from the boresight of the telescope by a large angle, giving very low systematic errors due to pickup of those sources in the telescope sidelobes. LiteBIRD's ability to measure the entire sky at the largest angular scales with 15 frequency bands is complementary to that of ground-based experiments, which will focus on deep observations of low-foreground sky to search for an inflationary signal. LiteBIRD observations have the potential to detect both the recombination peak at ℓ ≃ 80 and the reionization peak at ℓ ≃ 4. As highlighted earlier, high significance detections of both peaks would provide firm evidence that we have detected the signature of inflation.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT flagship science missions with a 30 Billion Yen cost cap. There will be three L-class missions in about ten years, launched using JAXA's H3 rocket. LiteBIRD passed an initial down-selection and completed a two-year Pre-Phase-A2 concept development phase in 2018. JAXA selected LiteBIRD in May 2019 as the second L-class mission after MMX, the Martian Moons Exploration, which will be launched in the mid-2020s. The LiteBIRD Collaboration has more than 300 researchers as of January 2022, based in Japan, North America, and Europe, with experience in CMB experiments, X-ray satellite missions, and other large projects in high-energy physics and astronomy. In particular, a large number of researchers who worked on the Planck satellite are members of LiteBIRD. We thus consider LiteBIRD to be the successor to the Planck satellite.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT different values of r. Among them, there are well-motivated inflationary models that predict r > 0. 01  [30]. If our requirement is δr < 0. 001, we can provide more than 10 σ detection significance for such models. On the other hand, if LiteBIRD finds no primordial B modes and obtains an upper limit on r, then this limit will be stringent enough to set severe constraints on the physics of inflation. As discussed in Sect. 2. 4, if we obtain an upper limit at r ∼ 0. 002, we can completely rule out one important category of models, namely any single-field model in which the characteristic field-variation scale of the inflaton potential is greater than the reduced Planck mass. The mission shall obtain full-sky CMB linear polarization maps for achieving > 5 σ significance using 2 ≤ ℓ ≤ 10 and 11 ≤ ℓ ≤ 200 separately, assuming r = 0.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT on the complexity of the astronomical foreground components, the cooling-chain lifetime, and basic system redundancy guidelines. There are in total 11 Lv2 measurement requirements on the statistical uncertainty (Lv2. 01), the systematic uncertainty (Lv2. 02), the scan strategy (Lv2. 03), the angular resolution (Lv2. 04), calibration measurements (Lv2. 05), error budget allocation (Lv2. 06), systematic error budget allocation (Lv2. 07), the duration of the normal observation phase (Lv2. 08), the orbit (Lv2. 09), observer bias (Lv2. 10), and noise-covariance knowledge (Lv2. 11). Our error budget (Lv2. 06) is defined such that an equal amount is given to the total statistical error after foreground separation σ stat , and the total systematic error σ syst. The requirements we chose are thus σ stat < 0.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT and orbit of LiteBIRD, we plan to adopt the H3-22L configuration, which means two firststage engines, two boosters, and the long fairing. The estimated launch capability with this configuration is larger than 3. 5 t. We thus set a provisional requirement on the total weight of LiteBIRD as < 3. 5 t. This requirement may be updated after the first flight of the H3 rocket. In most cases, the launch environment of H3 is expected to be similar or more moderate than that of H-IIA. Details of the launch environment may depend on the rocket configuration, especially on the number of solid rocket boosters, the satellite mass, and the flight path. We conservatively assume the launch environment of H-IIA in general for the design of LiteBIRD. However, when the launch environment is critical in the design, such as for the mechanical requirement on the fundamental frequency of the satellite, we adopt requirements based on the current best estimation of the performance of H3.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT the telescopes, at the top of the spacecraft and the solar panels at its bottom, perpendicular to the spin axis. The high-gain antenna should be placed on the bottom side of the satellite, i. e. , opposite the mission instruments, to point to the Earth and reduce interference with the telescopes. Based on these considerations, we show the basic structure of the spacecraft in Fig. 5. In this configuration, the whole spacecraft spins, and the possibility of using a slip-ring to rotate only the PLM is not adopted. The main reasons for this selection are to handle large heat dissipation in the PLM and to reduce the possibility of a single-point failure. The PLM is equipped with mechanical coolers, which dissipate a fairly large amount of heat. A radiator of sufficient size to dissipate the heat can be equipped only in the Service Module (SVM) and it is not easy to transfer heat from the spinning PLM through the slip-ring to a non-spinning SVM.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT We show the block diagram of the spacecraft in Fig. 6. The LiteBIRD spacecraft uses a typical satellite configuration. Observation of the entire sky is conducted through the scan strategy that is detailed in Sect. 5. 1. The slow spin rate of 0. 05 rpm makes it possible to adopt three-axis attitude control that satisfies the LiteBIRD attitude accuracy requirements, even if the spacecraft spins. The spacecraft will have a total weight of 2. 6 t, including the fuel of approximately 400 kg, and a total height of 5. 3 m. Thus the current weight has a large margin compared to the rocket's capability. We estimate the total power of the spacecraft to be 3. 0 kW. The downlink rate will be 10 Mbps in X-band and will transfer a total of 17. 9 GB of scientific data every day.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT placed on the upper parts of the side panels of the spacecraft. The total area of the radiators may be estimated to be approximately 10 m 2. Heat pipes may be used to transfer heat from the components to the radiators. When accurate temperature control is required, heaters are used in combination with the radiators. LiteBIRD uses X-band for telemetry and command (and ranging), and also for the downlink of the mission data. The main reason to use X-band for telemetry and command is that the primary GRound station for deep space Exploration And Tele-communication (GREAT) supports only X-band, not S-band, for uplink. We will also use the 34-m antenna at Uchinoura Space Center (USC) as a secondary station. Because GREAT is the only deep space station in Japan, many interplanetary satellites will use the station.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT After the initial checkout of the SVM, we will start the health check of the PLM. The launch-locks of the PMUs are released after the health check. The half-wave plate will be supported by the holding mechanism. We then start cooling the telescopes with a combination of radiative cooling and the shield cooler. The Joule-Thomson (JT) coolers and the adiabatic demagnetization refrigerators (ADRs) are turned on at the appropriate timing. This initial cooling takes a relatively long time, approximately 70 or 80 days. When the nominal operation temperature of the focal-plane detectors is reached, their function and performance are checked. Thus most of the cruising phase out to L2, which may last approximately 100 days, will be spent for the initial cooling. When the spacecraft arrives at L2, an insertion maneuver into the Lissajous orbit will be carried out.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT With 4508 detectors sampling at 19. 1 Hz for 3 years, the LiteBIRD mission will gather 8 × 10 12 detector samples. Manipulating this data volume while capturing all of the correlations in the CMB signals, foregrounds, and instrumental noise and systematics, with sufficient precision to yield reliable, unbiased results, is a computationally challenging task, requiring the use of state-of-the-art high-performance computing systems. Similarly, tracking the provenance of all of the data products, including the myriad data cuts used to check the robustness of the analysis, requires dedicated databases accessible to all collaboration members. The biggest data challenges for LiteBIRD will be removing astrophysical foreground contamination using the sky maps at the 15 observing frequency bands (Sect.
5. 2), and mitigating systematic effects and precise characterization of their residuals (Sect. 5. 3). The LiteBIRD PLM consists of three telescopes -at low, medium, and high frequencies -with their respective cryo-structure and focal planes cooled down to 0. 1 K. The PLM also includes the global cooling chain from 300 K to 4. 8 K, and room-temperature elements, such as drivers and warm readout electronics of the detectors. Requirements for the PLM have been derived from the top-level requirement of achieving a tensor-to-scalar ratio error of δr < 0. 001 (see Sect. 3. 2). Table  3  gives information on the frequency bands, beam sizes, and NETs for each of the 15 frequency channels. A discussion of the NET calculations is given in Sect. 5. 1. The LiteBIRD requirements imply technical challenges for the PLM, in terms of sensitivity, optical properties, stability, or even compactness, over a wide range of frequencies, from 34 to 34/156 ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT 448 GHz.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT In the following sections, we provide more details on the instrumental setup, following the natural path of the scientific signal, i. e. , starting with the optical and mechanical descriptions of the LFT (Sect. 4. 2) and MFT and HFT (Sect. 4. 3) telescopes. Since the detection chain of the three telescopes follows a common architecture, it is globally described in Sect. 4. 4 for LFT, MFT, and HFT, while the global electrical architecture of the PLM is detailed in Sect. 4. 6. A description of the whole cooling chain, from 300 K down to 100 mK is provided in Sect. 4. 7. Finally the ground and in-flight calibration plan of the whole instrumental setup is discussed in Sect. 4. 8.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT absorbers. An overview of the LFT is presented in Fig. 9 , introducing the various components listed above. Performance requirements of the LFT are described in Ref. [174]  and a design flow is shown in Fig. 10. Starting from an optical design satisfying the instrument requirements, we proceded with physical optics simulations and by completing the structural design to correctly match the interface requirements. A scaled version of LFT has allowed us to validate the models based on the scaled model measurements  [175]. 4. 2. 2. Optical Design. The challenges of LiteBIRD include its wide field of view (FoV) and broadband capabilities for millimeter-wave polarization measurements, which are derived from the sensitivity requirements. The wide FoV corresponds to a large focal plane area, so that a detector pixel has different spill-over or edge-taper at reflectors depending on the pixel position on the focal plane.
ORIGINAL UNEDITED MANUSCRIPT microwave absorber  [180] , and 3D-printed absorber  [181]  are candidates for such an absorber as described in Section 4. 3. 3. Eccosorb AN72 and HR10 are also candidates, however, they have large total mass loss (TML) and collected volatile condensable material (CVCM). According to the NASA outgas database  [182] , AN72 washed with ethanol shows reasonable TML and CVCM values. A front hood whose height is 500 mm reduces straylight to the far sidelobes. The aperture shape of the front hood is described in Ref. [175].