Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study k-strings in deformed Yang-Mills (dYM) with SU(N) gauge group in the semiclassically calculable regime on $$ {\mathbb{R}}^3\times {\mathbb{S}}^1 $$ . Their tensions Tk are computed in two ways: numerically, for 2 ≤ N ≤ 10, and via an analytic approach using a re-summed perturbative expansion. The latter serves both as a consistency check on the numerical results and as a tool to analytically study the large-N limit. We find that dYM k-string ratios Tk/T1 do not obey the well-known sine- or Casimir-scaling laws. Instead, we show that the ratios Tk/T1 are bound above by a square root of Casimir scaling, previously found to hold for stringlike solutions of the MIT Bag Model. The reason behind this similarity is that dYM dynamically realizes, in a theoretically controlled setting, the main model assumptions of the Bag Model. We also compare confining strings in dYM and in other four-dimensional theories with abelian confinement, notably Seiberg-Witten theory, and show that the unbroken $$ {\mathbb{Z}}_N $$ center symmetry in dYM leads to different properties of k-strings in the two theories; for example, a “baryon vertex” exists in dYM but not in softly-broken Seiberg-Witten theory. Our results also indicate that, at large values of N, k-strings in dYM do not become free.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".