MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The logarithmic Cardy case: Boundary states and annuli

2018· article· en· W2775447189 on OpenAlexafffund
Jürgen Fuchs, Terry Gannon, Gregor Schaumann, Christoph Schweigert

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Physics B · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVetenskapsrådetAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsConformal mapBoundary (topology)Central chargeMinimal modelsConformal field theoryTheoretical physicsBoundary conformal field theoryInterpretation (philosophy)Pure mathematicsPhysicsRational functionMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldGeometryMathematical analysisFree boundary problemComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a model-independent study of boundary states in the Cardy case that covers all conformal field theories for which the representation category of the chiral algebra is a – not necessarily semisimple – modular tensor category. This class, which we call finite CFTs, includes all rational theories, but goes much beyond these, and in particular comprises many logarithmic conformal field theories. We show that the following two postulates for a Cardy case are compatible beyond rational CFT and lead to a universal description of boundary states that realizes a standard mathematical setup: First, for bulk fields, the pairing of left and right movers is given by (a coend involving) charge conjugation; and second, the boundary conditions are given by the objects of the category of chiral data. For rational theories our proposal reproduces the familiar result for the boundary states of the Cardy case. Further, with the help of sewing we compute annulus amplitudes. Our results show in particular that these possess an interpretation as partition functions, a constraint that for generic finite CFTs is much more restrictive than for rational ones.

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 score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear Physics BSame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207