MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786960025 · doi:10.1142/s0217751x18500999

Fidelity susceptibility for Lifshitz geometries via Lifshitz holography

2018· article· en· W2786960025 on OpenAlexaff
Davood Momeni, Mir Faizal, Aizhan Myrzakul, Ratbay Myrzakulov

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics A · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsFidelityTheoretical physicsField (mathematics)High fidelityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to analyze the fidelity susceptibility of nonrelativistic field theories, which are important in condensed matter systems, we generalize the proposal to obtain the fidelity susceptibility holographically to Lifshitz geometries. It will be argued that this proposal can be used to study the fidelity susceptibility for various condensed matter systems. To demonstrate this, we will explicitly use this proposal to analyze the fidelity susceptibility for a nonrelativistic many-body system and argue that the fidelity susceptibility of this theory can be holographically obtained from a bulk Lifshitz geometry. In fact, using an Einstein-Dilaton–Maxwell–AdS–Lifshitz theory, we explicitly demonstrated that the fidelity susceptibility obtained from this bulk geometry is equal to the fidelity susceptibility of a bosonic many-body system.

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)0.002
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics ASame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207