A shape dynamical approach to holographic renormalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We provide a bottom-up argument to derive some known results from holographic renormalization using the classical bulk–bulk equivalence of General Relativity and Shape Dynamics, a theory with spatial conformal (Weyl) invariance. The purpose of this paper is twofold: (1) to advertise the simple classical mechanism, trading off gauge symmetries, that underlies the bulk–bulk equivalence of General Relativity and Shape Dynamics to readers interested in dualities of the type of AdS/conformal field theory (CFT); and (2) to highlight that this mechanism can be used to explain certain results of holographic renormalization, providing an alternative to the AdS/CFT conjecture for these cases. To make contact with the usual semiclassical AdS/CFT correspondence, we provide, in addition, a heuristic argument that makes it plausible that the classical equivalence between General Relativity and Shape Dynamics turns into a duality between radial evolution in gravity and the renormalization group flow of a CFT. We believe that Shape Dynamics provides a new perspective on gravity by giving conformal structure a primary role within the theory. It is hoped that this work provides the first steps toward understanding what this new perspective may be able to teach us about holographic dualities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".