MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chiral asymmetry and axial anomaly in magnetized relativistic matter

2010· article· en· W2081851996 on OpenAlexafffund
É. V. Gorbar, V. A. Miransky, I. A. Shovkovy

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Letters B · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaArizona State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsChiral anomalyAsymmetryRegularization (linguistics)Quantum electrodynamicsDispersion relationDimensional regularizationInvariant (physics)Anomaly (physics)FermionMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsRenormalization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The induced axial current and the chiral anomaly are studied in the normal phase of magnetized relativistic matter. A special attention is paid to the role of the chiral shift parameter Δ, leading to a relative shift of the longitudinal momenta in the dispersion relations of opposite chirality fermions. In the Nambu–Jona–Lasinio model, it is shown directly from the form of the gap equation that Δ necessarily exists in the normal phase in a magnetic field. By making use of the gauge invariant point-splitting regularization, we then show that the presence of Δ essentially modifies the form of the axial current, but does not affect the conventional axial anomaly relation. By recalculating the axial current with the proper-time regularization, we conclude that the result is robust with respect to a specific regularization scheme used.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics Letters BSame topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207