MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1896552858 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2012-0350

Lifshitz holographic renormalization from anti-de Sitter

2012· article· en· W1896552858 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Wissam Chemissany, David Geissbühler, Jelle Hartong, Blaise Rollier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsDilatonMathematical physicsRenormalizationAnti-de Sitter spaceCritical exponentMassless particleDe Sitter spaceRenormalization groupScalar (mathematics)Space (punctuation)Critical phenomenaExponentDimensional reductionScalar fieldDe Sitter universeQuantum mechanicsPhase transitionGeometryUniverse

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lifshitz space–times with critical exponent z = 2 can be obtained by dimensional reduction of Schrödinger space–times with critical exponent z = 0. The latter space–times are asymptotically anti-de Sitter (AdS) solutions of AdS gravity coupled to an axion–dilaton system (or even just a massless scalar field). This basic observation is used to perform holographic renormalization for four-dimensional asymptotically locally Lifshitz space–times by dimensional reduction of the corresponding problem of holographic renormalization for five-dimensional asymptotically AdS space–times coupled to an axion–dilaton system. In this setup the four-dimensional structure of the Lifshitz – Fefferman-Graham expansion and the structure of the counterterm action, including the scale anomaly, will be summarized.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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