MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2754153853 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2017)006

Holomorphic scalar portals and the OPE

2017· article· en· W2754153853 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean-François Fortin, Shanny Pelchat-Voyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHolomorphic functionScalar (mathematics)Formalism (music)SupersymmetryPhysicsOperator product expansionMathematical physicsSupersymmetry breakingSymmetry breakingParticle physicsTheoretical physicsPure mathematicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Visible-sector SUSY-breaking effects are computed in terms of hidden-sector correlation functions for generic holomorphic scalar portals. The solutions, which are valid irrespective of the hidden-sector dynamics, are approximated with the help of the operator product expansion (OPE). Indeed, for theories with superconformal symmetry at high energy, the superconformal OPE formalism can be used to disentangle the high-energy dynamics, encoded in the OPE coefficients, from the low-energy dynamics of the SUSY-breaking vacuum expectation values. A systematic method is proposed to compute the OPE coefficients, using relations between correlation functions of superfields and correlation functions of their quasi-primary component fields. The method, which is quite general, could be useful in building models of gauge- or gravity-mediated SUSY breaking and in analysing the viability of such models in a systematic way.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→