MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2014546178 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2015)066

Defect networks and supersymmetric loop operators

2015· article· en· W2014546178 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew Bullimore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsPhysicsMonodromyLoop (graph theory)Operator product expansionConformal field theoryOperator (biology)Topological algebraConnection (principal bundle)Context (archaeology)Representation theoryTopological quantum field theoryTopology (electrical circuits)Pure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldConformal mapMathematical physicsMathematicsTopological quantum numberQuantum mechanicsCombinatoricsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider topological defect networks with junctions in A N − 1 Toda CFT and the connection to supersymmetric loop operators in $$ \mathcal{N}=2 $$ theories of class $$ \mathcal{S} $$ on a four-sphere. Correlation functions in the presence of topological defect networks are computed by exploiting the monodromy of conformal blocks, generalising the notion of a Verlinde operator. Concentrating on a class of topological defects in A 2 Toda theory, we find that the Verlinde operators generate an algebra whose structure is determined by a set of generalised skein relations that encode the representation theory of a quantum group. In the second half of the paper, we explore the dictionary between topological defect networks and supersymmetric loop operators in the $$ \mathcal{N}={2}^{*} $$ theory by comparing to exact localisation computations. In this context, the the generalised skein relations are related to the operator product expansion of loop operators.

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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→