MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Double Life of Thermal QCD

2013· article· en· W2963538679 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohammed Mia, Keshav Dasgupta, Charles Gale, Sangyong Jeon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum chromodynamicsPhysicsSupergravityElectroweak interactionParticle physicsTheoretical physicsGauge theoryString theoryMathematical physicsSupersymmetry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the gravity dual of a thermal gauge theory whose behavior parallels that of thermal QCD in the far IR. The UV of our theory has infinite degrees of freedom. We holographically renormalize the supergravity action to compute the stress tensor of the dual gauge theory with fundamental flavors incorporating the logarithmic running of the gauge coupling. From the stress tensor we obtain the shear viscosity and the entropy of the medium at a temperature T, and investigate the violation of the bound for the viscosity to the entropy ratio. This is a shortened and simplified companion paper to hep-th/0902.1540, and is based on the talks given by M. Mia at the "Strong and Electroweak Matter 2008" workshop and the McGill workshop on "AdS/CFT, Condensed Matter and QCD" in the fall of 2008; and K. Dasgupta at the "Sixth International Symposium on Quantum Theory and Symmetries (QTS6)", July 2009.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207