MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991376628 · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.09.005

Data science applications to string theory

2019· article· en· W2991376628 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilBanff International Research Station for Mathematical Innovation and DiscoveryUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoAspen Center for PhysicsAbdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical PhysicsCERNUniversity of PennsylvaniaMicrosoft Research
KeywordsString (physics)PhysicsCluster analysisVariety (cybernetics)Machine learningString theoryUnsupervised learningArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceComputer scienceTheoretical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We first introduce various algorithms and techniques for machine learning and data science. While there is a strong focus on neural network applications in unsupervised, supervised and reinforcement learning, other machine learning techniques are discussed as well. These include various clustering and anomaly detection algorithms, support vector machines, and decision trees. In addition, we review data science techniques such as genetic algorithms and topological data analysis. This first part of the review makes some reference to concepts in physics, but the explanations and examples do not assume any knowledge of string theory and should therefore be accessible to a wide variety of readers with a physics background. After that, we illustrate applications to string theory. We give an overview of existing string theory data sets and describe how they can be studied using data science techniques. We also explain the computational complexity involved in the investigation of string vacua. Example codes that illustrate the techniques introduced in this review are available from Fabian Ruehle (0000).

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.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.281 · 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