MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1534130103 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2016-0242

Asymptotic freedom and quarks confinement treated through Thompson’s approach

2016· article· en· W1534130103 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cláudio Nassif, A. C. Amaro de Faria, P.R. Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
KeywordsPhysicsAsymptotic freedomQuantum chromodynamicsParamagnetismQuarkQCD vacuumColor confinementCondensed matter physicsQuantum electrodynamicsRenormalizationParticle physicsQuantum mechanicsLattice QCD

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we first use Thompson’s renormalization group method to treat QCD–vacuum behavior close to the regime of asymptotic freedom. The QCD–vacuum behaves effectively like a “paramagnetic system” of a classical theory in the sense that virtual color charges (gluons) emerge in it as a spin effect of a paramagnetic material when a magnetic field aligns their microscopic magnetic dipoles. Making a classical analogy with the paramagnetism of Landau’s theory, we are able to introduce a kind of Landau effective action without temperature and phase transition for just representing QCD–vacuum behavior at higher energies as being magnetization of a paramagnetic material in the presence of a magnetic field H. This reasoning allows us to use Thompson’s heuristic approach to obtain an “effective susceptibility” (χ > 0) of the QCD–vacuum. It depends on the logarithm of the energy scale u to investigate hadronic matter. Consequently, we are able to get an “effective magnetic permeability” (μ > 1) of such a “paramagnetic vacuum”. As the QCD–vacuum must obey Lorentz invariance, the attainment of μ > 1 must simply require that the “effective electrical permittivity” is ϵ < 1 in such a way that μϵ = 1 (c2 = 1). This leads to the anti-screening effect, where the asymptotic freedom takes place. On the other hand, quarks confinement, a subject which is not treatable by perturbative calculations, is worked by the present approach. We apply the method to study this issue for obtaining the string constant, which is in agreement with the experiments.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→