MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008633137 · doi:10.3390/universe6070097

Tensor Network Renormalization with Fusion Charges—Applications to 3D Lattice Gauge Theory

2020· preprint· en· W3008633137 on OpenAlex
William J. Cunningham, Bianca Dittrich, Sebastian Steinhaus

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniverse · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservablePhysicsLattice (music)Basis (linear algebra)Renormalization groupGranularityGauge theoryStatistical physicsQuantumLattice field theoryQuantum entanglementFusionScalingTheoretical physicsMathematicsComputer scienceMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tensor network methods are powerful and efficient tools for studying the properties and dynamics of statistical and quantum systems, in particular in one and two dimensions. In recent years, these methods have been applied to lattice gauge theories, yet these theories remain a challenge in ( 2 + 1 ) dimensions. In this article, we present a new (decorated) tensor network algorithm, in which the tensors encode the lattice gauge amplitude expressed in the fusion basis. This has several advantages—firstly, the fusion basis does diagonalize operators measuring the magnetic fluxes and electric charges associated to a hierarchical set of regions. The algorithm allows therefore a direct access to these observables. Secondly the fusion basis is, as opposed to the previously employed spin network basis, stable under coarse-graining. Thirdly, due to the hierarchical structure of the fusion basis, the algorithm does implement predefined disentanglers. We apply this new algorithm to lattice gauge theories defined for the quantum group SU ( 2 ) k and identify a weak and a strong coupling phase for various levels k . As we increase the level k , the critical coupling g c decreases linearly, suggesting the absence of a deconfining phase for the continuous group SU ( 2 ) . Moreover, we illustrate the scaling behaviour of the Wilson loops in the two phases.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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