MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736543243 · doi:10.1007/jhep05(2018)092

Constraints on higher spin CFT2

2018· article· en· W2736543243 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAspen Center for PhysicsSimons FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSymmetry (geometry)Spin (aerodynamics)Central chargeDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Dimension (graph theory)Conformal field theoryConformal mapPrimary fieldField (mathematics)Conformal symmetry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We derive constraints on two-dimensional conformal field theories with higher spin symmetry due to unitarity, modular invariance, and causality. We focus on CFTs with $$ {\mathcal{W}}_N $$ W N symmetry in the “irrational” regime, where c > N − 1 and the theories have an infinite number of higher-spin primaries. The most powerful constraints come from positivity of the Kac matrix, which (unlike the Virasoro case) is non-trivial even when c > N − 1. This places a lower bound on the dimension of any non-vacuum higher-spin primary state, which is linear in the central charge. At large c, this implies that the dual holographic theories of gravity in AdS3, if they exist, have no local, perturbative degrees of freedom in the semi-classical limit.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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