MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593064619 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.96.035142

Spectrum of the Wilson-Fisher conformal field theory on the torus

2017· article· en· W2593064619 on OpenAlexafffund
Seth Whitsitt, Michael Schuler, Louis-Paul Henry, Andreas M. Läuchli, Subir Sachdev

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceAustrian Science FundArmy Research OfficeCenovus EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTorusConformal field theoryConformal mapField (mathematics)Spectrum (functional analysis)Quantum electrodynamicsTheoretical physicsPhysicsMathematical physicsMathematicsPure mathematicsGeometryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors study the finite-size energy spectrum of the O($N$) symmetric Wilson-Fisher conformal field theory (CFT) on the spatial torus. They first perform an analytic calculation of the spectrum using the $ϵ$ expansion with a careful treatment of the zero-momentum modes. The authors also perform exact diagonalization on several lattice Hamiltonians whose critical points are known to be described by the Wilson-Fisher CFT. Comparison of the analytic and numerical data demonstrates that the energy spectrum is a useful diagnostic for determining the universality class of a critical point. These results have applications in determining the critical behavior of more complicated many-body systems.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207