MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323131356 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2012-0408

A canonical analysis of the massless superparticle

2013· preprint· en· W2323131356 on OpenAlexaffvenue
D. G. C. McKeon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2013
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced NMR Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassless particleSpinorSymmetry (geometry)PhysicsAction (physics)Canonical transformationClass (philosophy)Generator (circuit theory)Canonical formCanonical analysisCanonical coordinatesMathematical physicsTransformation (genetics)Pure mathematicsMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldTheoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsQuantumGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The canonical structure of the action for a massless superparticle is considered in d = 2 + 1 and d = 3 + 1 dimensions. This is done by examining the contribution to the action of each of the components of the spinor θ present; no attempt is made to maintain manifest covariance. Upon using the Dirac bracket to eliminate the second class constraints arising from the canonical momenta associated with half of these components, we find that the remaining components have canonical momenta that are all first-class constraints. From these first class constraints, it is possible to derive the generator of half of the local Fermionic κ-symmetry of Siegel; which half is contingent upon the choice of which half of the momenta associated with the components of θ are taken to be second class constraints. The algebra of the generator of this Fermionic symmetry transformation is examined.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAdvanced NMR Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207