MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891211397 · doi:10.1007/jhep07(2019)178

Classifying 5d SCFTs via 6d SCFTs: rank one

2019· article· en· W2891211397 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRank (graph theory)TwistLimit (mathematics)CoulombInverseFixed pointSet (abstract data type)Point (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Following a recent proposal, we delineate a general procedure to classify 5d SCFTs via compactifications of 6d SCFTs on a circle (possibly with a twist by a discrete global symmetry). The path from 6d SCFTs to 5d SCFTs can be divided into two steps. The first step involves computing the Coulomb branch data of the 5d KK theory obtained by compactifying a 6d SCFT on a circle of finite radius. The second step involves computing the limit of the KK theory when the inverse radius along with some other mass parameters is sent to infinity. Under this RG flow, the KK theory reduces to a 5d SCFT. We illustrate these ideas in the case of untwisted compactifications of rank one 6d SCFTs that can be constructed in F-theory without frozen singularities. The data of the corresponding KK theory can be packaged in the geometry of a Calabi-Yau threefold that we explicitly compute for every case. The RG flows correspond to flopping a collection of curves in the threefold and we formulate a concrete set of criteria which can be used to determine which collection of curves can induce the relevant RG flows, and, in principle, to determine the Calabi-Yau geometries describing the endpoints of these flows. We also comment on how to generalize our results to arbitrary rank.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations81
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207