MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892039634 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2019)078

Berends-Giele currents in Bern-Carrasco-Johansson gauge for F3- and F4-deformed Yang-Mills amplitudes

2019· article· en· W2892039634 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucia M. Garozzo, Leonel Queimada, Oliver Schlotterer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueVetenskapsrådetKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseGovernment of CanadaInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsDuality (order theory)Gauge (firearms)AmplitudeTensor (intrinsic definition)Mathematical physicsDimension (graph theory)Gauge theoryGravitationYang–Mills existence and mass gapPhysicsMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We construct new representations of tree-level amplitudes in D-dimensional gauge theories with deformations via higher-mass-dimension operators α ′ F 3 and α ′2 F 4. Based on Berends-Giele recursions, the tensor structure of these amplitudes is compactly organized via off-shell currents. On the one hand, we present manifestly cyclic representations, where the complexity of the currents is systematically reduced. On the other hand, the duality between color and kinematics due to Bern, Carrasco and Johansson is manifested by means of non-linear gauge transformations of the currents. We exploit the resulting notion of Bern-Carrasco-Johansson gauge to provide explicit and manifestly local double-copy representations for gravitational amplitudes involving α ′ R 2 and α ′2 R 3 operators.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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