MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897483717 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2018)190

Strings with non-relativistic conformal symmetry and limits of the AdS/CFT correspondence

2018· article· en· W2897483717 on OpenAlexafffund
Troels Harmark, Jelle Hartong, Lorenzo Menculini, Niels A. Obers, Ziqi Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueRoyal SocietyGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsConformal field theoryMathematical physicsDuality (order theory)String theoryScaling limitAnti-de Sitter spaceConformal symmetryTheoretical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsConformal mapScalingGeometryPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract We find a Polyakov-type action for strings moving in a torsional Newton-Cartan geometry. This is obtained by starting with the relativistic Polyakov action and fixing the momentum of the string along a non-compact null isometry. For a flat target space, we show that the world-sheet theory becomes the Gomis-Ooguri action. From a target space perspective these strings are non-relativistic but their world-sheet theories are still relativistic. We show that one can take a scaling limit in which also the world-sheet theory becomes non-relativistic with an infinite-dimensional symmetry algebra given by the Galilean conformal algebra. This scaling limit can be taken in the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence and we show that it is realized by the ‘Spin Matrix Theory’ limits of strings on AdS 5 × S 5 . Spin Matrix theory arises as non-relativistic limits of the AdS/CFT correspondence close to BPS bounds. The duality between non-relativistic strings and Spin Matrix theory provides a holographic duality of its own and points towards a framework for more tractable holographic dualities whereby non-relativistic strings are dual to near BPS limits of the dual field theory.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations137
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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