MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142002422 · doi:10.1007/jhep10(2014)105

2PI resummation in 3D SU(N ) Higgs theory

2014· article· en· W2142002422 on OpenAlexafffund
Mark C. Abraao York, Guy D. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsHiggs bosonResummationParticle physicsTheoretical physicsEuclidean geometryLattice (music)CrossoverGauge theoryQuantum chromodynamicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We test the utility of the 2PI formalism for solving nonperturbative dynamics of gauge theories by applying it to study the phase diagram of SU(N ) Higgs theory in 3 Euclidean spacetime dimensions. Solutions reveal standard signatures of a first order phase transition with a critical endpoint leading to a crossover regime, in qualitative agreement with lattice studies. The location of the critical endpoint, x ∼0.14 for SU(2) with a fundamental Higgs, is in rough but not tight quantitative agreement with the lattice. We end by commenting on the overall effectiveness and limitations of a 2PI (or in general nPI) effective action based study. In particular, we have been unable to find a 2PI gauge-fixing procedure which can simultaneously display the right phase structure and correctly handle the large-VEV Higgs region. We explain why doing so appears to be a serious challenge.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207