MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2475736760 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2017)061

Fusion basis for lattice gauge theory and loop quantum gravity

2017· article· en· W2475736760 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsQuantum gravityHilbert spaceLattice field theoryLoop quantum gravityQuantum entanglementLattice gauge theoryHamiltonian lattice gauge theoryGauge theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new basis for the gauge-invariant Hilbert space of lattice gauge theory and loop quantum gravity in (2 + 1) dimensions, the fusion basis. In doing so, we shift the focus from the original lattice (or spin-network) structure directly to that of the magnetic (curvature) and electric (torsion) excitations themselves. These excitations are classified by the irreducible representations of the Drinfel’d double of the gauge group, and can be readily “fused” together by studying the tensor product of such representations. We will also describe in detail the ribbon operators that create and measure these excitations and make the quasi-local structure of the observable algebra explicit. Since the fusion basis allows for both magnetic and electric excitations from the onset, it turns out to be a precious tool for studying the large scale structure and coarse-graining flow of lattice gauge theories and loop quantum gravity. This is in neat contrast with the widely used spin-network basis, in which it is much more complicated to account for electric excitations, i.e. for Gauß constraint violations, emerging at larger scales. Moreover, since the fusion basis comes equipped with a hierarchical structure, it readily provides the language to design states with sophisticated multi-scale structures. Another way to employ this hierarchical structure is to encode a notion of subsystems for lattice gauge theories and (2 + 1) gravity coupled to point particles. In a follow-up work, we have exploited this notion to provide a new definition of entanglement entropy for these theories.

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 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 score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.264 · 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