MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091771334 · doi:10.1088/0305-4470/33/8/313

Addendum to `On the singularity structure of the 2D Ising model susceptibility'

2000· article· en· W2091771334 on OpenAlexaff
B. G. Nickel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and General · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingularityAddendumSeries (stratigraphy)ScalingIsing modelMathematicsRepresentation (politics)Nonlinear systemEssential singularityMathematical physicsPure mathematicsStatistical physicsPhysicsMathematical analysisGeometryQuantum mechanicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A remarkable product formula first derived by Palmer and Tracy (1981 Adv. Appl. Math. 2 329) for the integrand of the two-dimensional Ising model susceptibility expansion coefficients (2 n ) for temperatures T less than the critical T c is shown to apply equally for (2 n +1) for T > T c and agrees with formulae derived by Yamada (1984 Prog. Theor. Phys. 71 1416). This new representation simplifies the derivation of the results in the original paper of this title (1999 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 32 3889) to the extent that the leading series behaviour and the singularity structure can be deduced almost by inspection. The derivation of series is also simplified and I show, using extended series and knowledge of the singularity structure, that there is now unambiguous evidence for correction to scaling terms in the susceptibility beyond those inferred from a nonlinear scaling field analysis.

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)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1660.079

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations63
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and GeneralSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207