MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014282613 · doi:10.1103/physreve.78.041122

Derivation of effective field theories

2008· article· en· W2014282613 on OpenAlexaff
Dimo I. Uzunov

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsing modelStatistical physicsConsistency (knowledge bases)GranularityField (mathematics)Theoretical physicsPhase transitionExtension (predicate logic)Point (geometry)Effective field theoryPhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A general self-consistency approach allows for a thorough treatment of the corrections to the mean-field approximation (MFA). The natural extension of standard MFA with the help of a cumulant expansion leads to a point of view on the effective field theories. The proposed approach can be used for a systematic treatment of fluctuation effects of various length scales and, perhaps, for the development of a coarse-graining procedure. We outline and justify our method by some preliminary calculations. Results are given for the critical temperature and the Landau parameters of the phi(4) theory--the field counterpart of the Ising model. An important unresolved problem of the modern theory of phase transitions--the problem for the calculation of the true critical temperature--is considered within the framework of the present approach. A comprehensive description of the ground-state properties of many-body systems is also demonstrated.

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)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207