MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2496991313 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2017)066

Free □ k scalar conformal field theory

2017· article· en· W2496991313 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Brust, Kurt Hinterbichler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsScalar (mathematics)Conformal mapPrimary fieldMathematicsLaplace operatorVerma moduleConformal field theoryTRACE (psycholinguistics)Field (mathematics)Scalar fieldDescendantNorm (philosophy)Pure mathematicsExtension (predicate logic)Dimension (graph theory)Spectrum (functional analysis)Mathematical physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisComputer scienceLie algebra

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the generalizations of the free U(N ) and O(N ) scalar conformal field theories to actions with higher powers of the Laplacian □ k , in general dimension d. We study the spectra, Verma modules, anomalies and OPE of these theories. We argue that in certain d and k, the spectrum contains zero norm operators which are both primary and descendant, as well as extension operators which are neither primary nor descendant. In addition, we argue that in even dimensions d ≤ 2k, there are well-defined operator algebras which are related to the □ k theories and are novel in that they have a finite number of single-trace states.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations63
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207