MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2897278247 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2019)001

2d small N=4 Long-multiplet superconformal block

2019· article· en· W2897278247 on OpenAlexafffund
Filip Kos, Jihwan Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaKwanjeong Educational FoundationGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMultipletSuperconformal algebraSuperspacePhysicsConstraint (computer-aided design)Mathematical physicsFunction (biology)Point (geometry)SupersymmetryMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract We study 2d N=4 superconformal field theories, focusing on its application on numerical bootstrap study. We derive the superconformal block by utilizing the global part of the super Virasoro algebra and set up the crossing equations for the non-BPS long-multiplet 4-point function. Along the way, we build global N=4 superconformal short and long multiplets and compute all possible 2,3-point functions of long-multiplets that are needed to construct the superconformal blocks and the crossing equations. Since we consider a long-multiplet 4-point function, the number of crossing equations is huge, and we expect it to give a strong constraint than the usual superconformal bootstrap analysis, which relies on BPS 4-point functions. In addition, we present an alternative way to derive crossing equations using N=4 superspace and comment on a puzzle.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→