MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588215345 · doi:10.1063/1.2399592

Contractions and deformations of Lie algebras in Physics

2006· article· en· W1588215345 on OpenAlexafffund
Alice Fialowski, M. de Montigny

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topics in Algebra
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHungarian Scientific Research Fund
KeywordsPure mathematicsRepresentation of a Lie groupAdjoint representation of a Lie algebraLie algebraLie groupNon-associative algebraNovikov self-consistency principleSimple Lie groupConverseContraction (grammar)Group (periodic table)PhysicsAlgebra over a fieldEinsteinLie conformal algebraMathematicsMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this contribution, we discuss the mutually opposite procedures of deformations and contractions of Lie algebras. From the group‐theoretical point of view, Einstein’s special theory of relativity is predicated on the replacement of the Galilei group by one of its deformations: the Poincaré group. Conversely, the Galilei group can be obtained by a contraction of the Poincaré group. Our principal objective is to demonstrate that appropriate combinations of both procedures may lead to new Lie algebras and thereby to new physical theories as well as new insights. To illustrate this, we recall that infinite‐dimensional Lie algebras of Krichever‐Novikov type can be retrieved by deforming the Virasoro or Kac‐Moody algebras. Then, in turn, contrations of Krichever‐Novikov algebras lead to new infinite‐dimensional Lie algebras. We end by discussing the real three‐dimensional Lie algebras. We observe that, whereas for every contraction there exists a reverse deformation, the converse is not true in general.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicAdvanced Topics in AlgebraFrench-language works237,207