MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775088606 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2018)062

Decoding a three-dimensional conformal manifold

2018· article· en· W2775088606 on OpenAlexafffund
Marco Baggio, Nikolay Bobev, Shai M. Chester, Edoardo Lauria, Silviu S. Pufu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersKU LeuvenFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeVlaamse regeringEuropean CommissionGovernment of CanadaIndustry CanadaSimons Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsConformal mapOrbifoldSuperpotentialManifold (fluid mechanics)Mathematical physicsDuality (order theory)Operator product expansionQuantum electrodynamicsPure mathematicsSupersymmetryMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the one-dimensional complex conformal manifold that controls the infrared dynamics of a three-dimensional $$ \mathcal{N} $$ = 2 supersymmetric theory of three chiral superfields with a cubic superpotential. Two special points on this conformal manifold are the well-known XYZ model and three decoupled copies of the critical Wess-Zumino model. The conformal manifold enjoys a discrete duality group isomorphic to S4 and can be thought of as an orbifold of CP1. We use the 4 − ε expansion and the numerical conformal bootstrap to calculate the spectrum of conformal dimensions of low-lying operators and their OPE coefficients, and find a very good quantitative agreement between the two approaches.

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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations60
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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