MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3086390776 · doi:10.1007/jhep01(2021)120

Conformal defects from string field theory

2021· article· en· W3086390776 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversidade Estadual PaulistaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloAbdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical PhysicsNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaSimons FoundationInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueICTP South American Institute for Fundamental ResearchInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsBoundary conformal field theoryConformal field theoryConformal mapString field theoryConformal anomalyMinimal modelsConformal symmetryBoundary value problemExtremal lengthString cosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Unlike conformal boundary conditions, conformal defects of Virasoro minimal models lack classification. Alternatively to the defect perturbation theory and the truncated conformal space approach, we employ open string field theory (OSFT) techniques to explore the space of conformal defects. We illustrate the method by an analysis of OSFT around the background associated to the (1, 2) topological defect in diagonal unitary minimal models. Numerical analysis of OSFT equations of motion leads to an identification of a nice family of solutions, recovering the picture of infrared fixed points due to Kormos, Runkel and Watts. In particular, we find a continuum of solutions in the Ising model case and 6 solutions for other minimal models. OSFT provides us with numerical estimates of the g-function and other coefficients of the boundary state.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→