MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gauge and supersymmetry invariance of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si1.gif" overflow="scroll"><mml:mi mathvariant="script">N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:math> boundary Chern–Simons theory

2016· article· lv· W2285859679 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Physics B · 2016
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational University of Singapore
KeywordsSupersymmetryCosetMathematical physicsGauge groupChern–Simons theoryBoundary (topology)PhysicsAbelian groupGauge theoryMathematicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysisDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the restoration of gauge symmetry and up to half the supersymmetry (N=(2,0) or N=(1,1) in two dimensions) for N=2 non-Abelian Chern–Simons theories in the presence of a boundary. We describe the boundary action which is a supersymmetric WZW model coupled to the bulk Chern–Simons theory. Unlike the N=1 case, higher supersymmetry (N=(2,0)) will endow the group manifold of the WZW model with a complex structure. Therefore, the N=(2,0) WZW model in our paper is constructed via a coset space Gc/G, where G is the same as the gauge group in the Chern–Simons action.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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