MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981759352 · doi:10.1007/jhep10(2019)204

On mirror maps for manifolds of exceptional holonomy

2019· article· en· W2981759352 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric Analysis and Curvature Flows
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsMirror symmetryHolonomyDifferential geometryTorsion (gastropod)Symmetry (geometry)Reflection symmetryType (biology)Topology (electrical circuits)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study mirror symmetry of type II strings on manifolds with the exceptional holonomy groupsG2and Spin(7). Our central result is a construction of mirrors of Spin(7) manifolds realized as generalized connected sums. In parallel to twisted connected sumG2manifolds, mirrors of such Spin(7) manifolds can be found by applying mirror symmetry to the pair of non-compact manifolds they are glued from. To provide non-trivial checks for such geometric mirror constructions, we give a CFT analysis of mirror maps for Joyce orbifolds in several new instances for both the Spin(7) and theG2case. For all of these models we find possible assignments of discrete torsion phases, work out the action of mirror symmetry, and confirm the consistency with the geometrical construction. A novel feature appearing in the examples we analyse is the possibility of frozen singularities.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicGeometric Analysis and Curvature FlowsFrench-language works237,207