MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007730738 · doi:10.1007/jhep07(2011)082

Seiberg-Witten and “Polyakov-like” magnetic bion confinements are continuously connected

2011· article· en· W2007730738 on OpenAlexafffund
Erich Poppitz, Mithat Ünsal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMagnetic monopolePhysicsDyonCompactification (mathematics)InstantonGauge theoryS-dualitySeiberg dualityMathematical physicsTheoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsSupersymmetric gauge theoryRelationship between string theory and quantum field theoryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study four-dimensional $ \mathcal{N} = 2 $ supersymmetricpure-gauge (Seiberg-Witten) theory and its $ \mathcal{N} = 1 $ mass perturbation by using compactification on $ {\mathbb{S}^1} \times {\mathbb{R}^3} $ . It is well known that on $ {\mathbb{R}^4} $ (or at large $ {\mathbb{S}^1} $ size L) the perturbed theory realizes confinement through monopole or dyon condensation. At small $ {\mathbb{S}^1} $ , we demonstrate that confinement is induced by a generalization of Polyakov’s three-dimensional instanton mechanism to a locally four-dimensionaltheory — the magneticbion mechanism — which also applies to a large class of nonsupersymmetric theories. Using a large-vs. small-L Poisson duality, we show that the two mechanisms of confinement, previously thought to be distinct, are in fact continuously connected.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations91
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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