Travelling kinks in discrete phi<sup>4</sup>models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, three exceptional discretizations of the phi^4 theory have been discovered [J.M. Speight and R.S. Ward, Nonlinearity 7, 475 (1994); C.M. Bender and A. Tovbis, J. Math. Phys. 38, 3700 (1997); P.G. Kevrekidis, Physica D 183, 68 (2003)] which support translationally invariant kinks, i.e. families of stationary kinks centred at arbitrary points between the lattice sites. It has been suggested that the translationally invariant stationary kinks may persist as 'sliding kinks', i.e. discrete kinks travelling at nonzero velocities without experiencing any radiation damping. The purpose of this study is to check whether this is indeed the case. By computing the Stokes constants in beyond-all-order asymptotic expansions, we prove that the three exceptional discretizations do not support sliding kinks for most values of the velocity - just like the standard, one-site, discretization. There are, however, isolated values of velocity for which radiationless kink propagation becomes possible. There is one such value for the discretization of Speight and Ward and three 'sliding velocities' for the model of Kevrekedis.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it