MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000553600 · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.8.4.054

$1/8$-BPS couplings and exceptional automorphic functions

2020· article· lv· W3000553600 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Guillaume Bossard, Axel Kleinschmidt, Boris Pioline

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBanff International Research Station for Mathematical Innovation and DiscoveryAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsEisenstein seriesAutomorphic formInstantonCompactification (mathematics)Mathematical physicsString theoryMathematicsPhysicsPure mathematicsModular form

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike the \mathcal{R}^4 ℛ4 and \nabla^4\mathcal{R}^4 ∇4ℛ4 couplings, whose coefficients are Langlands–Eisenstein series of the U-duality group, the coefficient \mathcal{E}^{(d)}_{(0,1)} ℰ(0,1)(d) of the \nabla^6\mathcal{R}^4 ∇6ℛ4 interaction in the low-energy effective action of type II strings compactified on a torus T^d Td belongs to a more general class of automorphic functions, which satisfy Poisson rather than Laplace-type equations. In earlier work [1], it was proposed that the exact coefficient is given by a two-loop integral in exceptional field theory, with the full spectrum of mutually 1/2-BPS states running in the loops, up to the addition of a particular Langlands–Eisenstein series. Here we compute the weak coupling and large radius expansions of these automorphic functions for any d d . We find perfect agreement with perturbative string theory up to genus three, along with non-perturbative corrections which have the expected form for 1/8-BPS instantons and bound states of 1/2-BPS instantons and anti-instantons. The additional Langlands–Eisenstein series arises from a subtle cancellation between the two-loop amplitude with 1/4-BPS states running in the loops, and the three-loop amplitude with mutually 1/2-BPS states in the loops. For d=4 d=4 , the result is shown to coincide with an alternative proposal [2] in terms of a covariantised genus-two string amplitude, due to interesting identities between the Kawazumi–Zhang invariant of genus-two curves and its tropical limit, and between double lattice sums for the particle and string multiplets, which may be of independent mathematical interest.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.006

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207