MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576902270 · doi:10.1007/jhep12(2015)156

Fricke S-duality in CHL models

2015· article· en· W1576902270 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel Persson, Roberto Volpato

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanghai Institute of Technical Physics, Chinese Academy of SciencesMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsHeterotic string theorySuperstring theoryPhysicsMathematical physicsDuality (order theory)Homogeneous spaceInvariant (physics)SpacetimeSymmetry (geometry)DilatonUniversality (dynamical systems)Theoretical physicsSupersymmetryQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider four dimensional CHL models with sixteen spacetime supersymmetries obtained from orbifolds of type IIA superstring on K3×T 2 by a $$ {\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}}_N $$ symmetry acting (possibly) non-geometrically on K3. We show that most of these models (in particular, for geometric symmetries) are self-dual under a weak-strong duality acting on the heterotic axio-dilaton modulus S by a “Fricke involution” S → −1/NS. This is a novel symmetry of CHL models that lies outside of the standard $$ \mathrm{S}\mathrm{L}\left(2,\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}\right) $$ -symmetry of the parent theory, heterotic strings on T 6. For self-dual models this implies that the lattice of purely electric charges is N-modular, i.e. isometric to its dual up to a rescaling of its quadratic form by N. We verify this prediction by determining the lattices of electric and magnetic charges in all relevant examples. We also calculate certain BPS-saturated couplings and verify that they are invariant under the Fricke S-duality. For CHL models that are not self-dual, the strong coupling limit is dual to type IIA compactified on $$ {T}^6/{\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}}_N $$ , for some $$ {\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}}_N $$ -symmetry preserving half of the spacetime supersymmetries.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207