Supervariable approach to nilpotent symmetries of a couple of N = 2 supersymmetric quantum mechanical models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We derive the on-shell as well as off-shell nilpotent supersymmetric (SUSY) symmetry transformations for the [Formula: see text] = 2 SUSY quantum mechanical model of a (0 + 1)-dimensional (1D) free SUSY particle by exploiting the SUSY-invariant restrictions on the (anti-)chiral supervariables of the SUSY theory that is defined on a (1, 2)-dimensional supermanifold (parametrized by a bosonic variable t and a pair of Grassmannian variables θ and [Formula: see text] with [Formula: see text]). Within the framework of our novel approach, we express the Lagrangian and conserved SUSY charges in terms of the (anti-)chiral supervariables to demonstrate the SUSY invariance of the Lagrangian as well as the nilpotency of the SUSY conserved charges in a simple manner. Our approach has the potential to be generalized to the description of other [Formula: see text] = 2 SUSY quantum mechanical systems with physically interesting potential functions. To corroborate the preceding assertion, we apply our method to derive the [Formula: see text] = 2 continuous and nilpotent SUSY transformations for one of the simplest interacting SUSY systems of a 1D harmonic oscillator.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".