MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885949085 · doi:10.4236/jamp.2019.73042

Revisiting the Computation of Cohomology Classes of the Witt Algebra Using Conformal Field Theory and Aspects of Conformal Algebra

2019· article· en· W2885949085 on OpenAlexaff
Jacksyn Bakeberg, Parthasarathi Nag

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Mathematics and Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperator product expansionPrimary fieldConformal field theoryAlgebra over a fieldWitt algebraVirasoro algebraMathematicsCohomologyLie conformal algebraPure mathematicsConformal mapAlgebra representationCellular algebraMathematical analysisMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we revisit some aspects of the computation of the cohomology class of ( )2 Witt, H  using some methods in two-dimensional conformal field theory and conformal algebra to obtain the one-dimensional central extension of the Witt algebra to the Virasoro algebra.Even though this is well-known in the context of standard mathematical physics literature, the operator product expansion of the energy-momentum tensor in two-dimensional conformal field theory is presented almost axiomatically.In this paper, we attempt to reformulate it with the help of a suitable modification of conformal algebra (as developed by V. Kac), and apply it to compute the representative element of the cohomology class which gives the desired central extension.This paper was written in the scope of an undergraduate's exploration of conformal field theory and to gain insight on the subject from a mathematical perspective.

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)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.010
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Mathematics and PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207