The S-matrix in twistor space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The marvelous simplicity and remarkable hidden symmetries recently uncovered in (Super) Yang-Mills and (Super)Gravity scattering amplitudes strongly suggests the existence of a "weak-weak" dual formulation of these theories where these structures are made more manifest at the expense of manifest locality. In this note we suggest that in four dimensions, this dual description lives in (2,2) signature and is naturally formulated in twistor space. We begin at tree-level, by recasting the momentum-space BCFW recursion relation in a completely on-shell form that begs to be transformed into twistor space. Our transformation is strongly inspired by Witten's twistor string theory, but differs in treating twistor and dual twistor variables on a more equal footing; a related transcription of the BCFW formula using only twistor space variables has been carried out independently by Mason and Skinner. Using both twistor and dual twistor variables, the three and four-point amplitudes are strikingly simple-for Yang-Mills theories they are "1" or "-1". The BCFW computation of higher-order amplitudes can be represented by a simple set of diagrammatic rules, concretely realizing Penrose's program of relating "twistor diagrams" to scattering amplitudes. More specifically, we give a precise definition of the twistor diagram formalism developed over the past few years by Andrew Hodges. The "Hodges diagram" representation of the BCFW rules allows us to compute amplitudes and study their remarkable properties in twistor space. For instance the diagrams for Yang-Mills theory are topologically disks and not trees, and reveal striking connections between amplitudes that are not manifest in momentum space. Twistor space also suggests a new Open Access
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".