MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023344447 · doi:10.1007/jhep09(2013)088

Double scaling in tensor models with a quartic interaction

2013· article· en· W2023344447 on OpenAlexafffund
Stéphane Dartois, Razvan Gurău, Vincent Rivasseau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsScalingLimit (mathematics)Quartic functionSingularityScaling limitMathematicsTensor (intrinsic definition)Matrix (chemical analysis)PhysicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract In this paper we identify and analyze in detail the subleading contributions in the 1 /N expansion of random tensors, in the simple case of a quartically interacting model. The leading order for this 1 /N expansion is made of graphs, called melons , which are dual to particular triangulations of the D -dimensional sphere, closely related to the “stacked” triangulations. For D < 6 the subleading behavior is governed by a larger family of graphs, hereafter called cherry trees , which are also dual to the D -dimensional sphere. They can be resummed explicitly through a double scaling limit. In sharp contrast with random matrix models, this double scaling limit is stable. Apart from its unexpected upper critical dimension 6, it displays a singularity at fixed distance from the origin and is clearly the first step in a richer set of yet to be discovered multi-scaling limits.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations134
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207