MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2271331837 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2020-0226

Thermodynamics of soft wall model of AdS/QCD in Einstein–Maxwell–Gauss–Bonnet gravity

2020· article· en· W2271331837 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shobhit Sachan, Sanjay Siwach

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGauss–Bonnet theoremPhysicsGaussDeconfinementGauss–Bonnet gravityAnti-de Sitter spaceEinsteinCoupling (piping)Quantum chromodynamicsConformal mapMathematical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsGeometryQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the thermodynamics of the confinement–deconfinement transition in the soft wall model of QCD with Gauss–Bonnet corrections using anti-de Sitter – conformal field theory (AdS/CFT) correspondence. In bulk AdS space–time the transition is geometric and is known as Hawking–Page transition. The Hawking–Page transition between two geometries, namely, charged AdS black hole and thermally charged AdS, have been studied with Gauss–Bonnet corrections up to first order. The Gauss–Bonnet coupling modifies the transition temperature of the system, but qualitative features remain unchanged. We obtain the curves between chemical potential and transition temperature for different values of Gauss–Bonnet couplings. We find that there exists a point in the μ–T plane where lines with different values of Gauss–Bonnet coupling cross. This point may be the onset of the transition from first-order to cross over behavior. The results are compared with that of the hard wall model.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→