MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963681812 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab56e9

String theory and string Newton–Cartan geometry*

2019· article· en· W2963681812 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersJulius-Maximilians-Universität WürzburgNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekUniversität WienRijksuniversiteit Groningen
KeywordsWorldsheetNon-critical string theoryString field theoryString phenomenologyRelationship between string theory and quantum field theoryString cosmologyBackground independenceDilatonString (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nonrelativistic string theory is described by a sigma model with a relativistic worldsheet and a nonrelativistic target spacetime geometry, that is called string Newton–Cartan geometry. In this paper we obtain string Newton–Cartan geometry as a limit of the Riemannian geometry of general relativity with a fluxless two-form field. We then apply the same limit to relativistic string theory in curved background fields and show that it leads to nonrelativistic string theory in a string Newton–Cartan geometry coupled to a Kalb–Ramond and dilaton field background. Finally, we use our limiting procedure to study the spacetime equations of motion and the T-duality transformations of nonrelativistic string theory. Our results reproduce the recent studies of beta-functions and T-duality of nonrelativistic string theory obtained from the microscopic worldsheet definition of nonrelativistic string 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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations104
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207