Feynman diagrams, ribbon graphs, and topological recursion of Eynard-Orantin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract We consider two seemingly unrelated problems, calculation of the WKB expansion of the harmonic oscillator wave functions and counting the number of Feynman diagrams in QED or in many-body physics and show that their solutions are both encoded in a single enumerative problem: calculation of the number of certain types of ribbon graphs. In turn, the numbers of such ribbon graphs as a function of the number of their vertices and edges can be determined recursively through the application of the topological recursion of Eynard-Orantin to the algebraic curve encoded in the Schrödinger equation of the harmonic oscillator. We show how the numbers of these ribbon graphs can be written down in closed form for any given number of vertices and edges. We use these numbers to obtain a formula for the number of N -rooted ribbon graphs with e edges, which is the same as the number of Feynman diagrams for 2 N -point function with e + 1 − N loops.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".