Adjoint “quarks” on coarse anisotropic lattices: Implications for string breaking in full QCD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A detailed study is made of four-dimensional SU(2) lattice gauge theory with static adjoint ``quarks'' in the context of string breaking. A tadpole-improved action is used to do simulations on lattices with coarse spatial spacings ${a}_{s},$ allowing the static potential to be probed at large separations at a dramatically reduced computational cost. Highly anisotropic lattices are used, with fine temporal spacings ${a}_{t},$ in order to assess the behavior of the time-dependent effective potentials. The lattice spacings ${a}_{s}$ and renormalized anisotropies are determined from the static potential for quarks in the fundamental representation. Simulations of the Wilson loop in the adjoint representation are done, and the energies of magnetic and electric ``gluelumps'' (adjoint-quark--gluon bound states), which set the energy scale for string breaking, are calculated. In addition, correlators of gauge-fixed static quark propagators, without a connecting string of spatial links, are analyzed. We also consider a matrix of correlation functions in a basis that includes a state with valence gluons; analogous correlators have recently been proposed for observing string breaking in full QCD and in other models. A thorough discussion of the relevance of Wilson loops over other operators for studies of string breaking is presented, using the simulation results presented here to support a number of new arguments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".