Conformal symmetry and composite operators in the O(N )3 tensor field theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We continue the study of the bosonic O(N )3 model with quartic interactions and long-range propagator. The symmetry group allows for three distinct invariant 𝜙 4 composite operators, known as tetrahedron, pillow and double-trace. As shown in [1, 2], the tetrahedron operator is exactly marginal in the large-N limit and for a purely imaginary tetrahedron coupling a line of real infrared fixed points (parametrized by the absolute value of the tetrahedron coupling) is found for the other two couplings. These fixed points have real critical exponents and a real spectrum of bilinear operators, satisfying unitarity constraints. This raises the question whether at large-N the model is unitary, despite the tetrahedron coupling being imaginary. In this paper, we first rederive the above results by a different regularization and renormalization scheme. We then discuss the operator mixing for composite operators and we give a perturbative proof of conformal invariance of the model at the infrared fixed points by adapting a similar proof from the long-range Ising model. At last, we identify the scaling operators at the fixed point and compute the two- and three-point functions of 𝜙 4 and 𝜙 2 composite operators. The correlations have the expected conformal behavior and the OPE coefficients are all real, reinforcing the claim that the large-N CFT is unitary.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".