MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2952916382

The 4PI Effective Action for \phi^4 Theory

2004· preprint· en· W2952916382 on OpenAlexaff
M. E. Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Effective actionFunction (biology)MathematicsPoint (geometry)Connection (principal bundle)Equations of motionOrder (exchange)Mathematical analysisGauge (firearms)Mathematical physicsPhysicsApplied mathematicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We work with $\\phi^4$ theory and study the 4PI effective action at 3-loop order. We discuss the relationship between the equations of motion obtained by taking functional derivatives of the effective action with respect to the variational parameters, and the Schwinger-Dyson (SD) equations. We show that the equation obtained by differentiating with respect to the 2-point function is identical to the SD equation for the 2-point function; differentiating with respect to the 3-point function reproduces the SD equation for the 3-point function, up to 1-loop order; and differentiating with respect to the 4-point function reproduces the SD equation for the 4-point function, at the tree level. These results establish a connection between two techniques for performing non-equilibrium calculations, and provide a starting place for a study of the gauge dependence of quantities derived from an $n$PI effective action.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.org→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→