Abelian dualities of $$ \mathcal{N} $$ = (0, 4) boundary conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose dual pairs of $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = (0, 4) half-BPS boundary conditions for 3d $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = 4 Abelian gauge theories related to mirror symmetry and S-duality by showing the matching of boundary ’t Hooft anomalies and supersymmetric indices. We find simple $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = (0, 4) mirror symmetry between 2d $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = (0, 4) Abelian gauge theories and free Fermi multiplets that generalizes $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = (0, 2) Abelian duality. We also propose a prescription for computing half-index of enriched Neumann boundary condition including 2d boundary bosonic matters by gauging the 2d boundary flavor symmetry of Dirichlet boundary condition. By coupling $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = (0,4) half-BPS boundary configurations of 3d $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = 4 gauge theories to quarter-BPS corner configurations of 4d $$ \mathcal{N} $$ N = 4 Super Yang-Mills theories, we further obtain a new type of 4d-3d-2d duality that may involve 3d non-Abelian gauge symmetry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".