MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099404033

The susceptibility of the square lattice Ising model: New developments

2012· article· en· W3099404033 on OpenAlexaff
William P. Orrick, B. G. Nickel, A J Guttmann, Jacques H. H. Perk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalingIsing modelSquare latticeMathematicsLattice (music)Statistical physicsSquare (algebra)Series expansionSeries (stratigraphy)Symmetry (geometry)AmplitudeMathematical physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have made substantial advances in elucidating the properties of the susceptibility of the square lattice Ising model. We discuss its analyticity properties, certain closed form expressions for subsets of the coefficients, and give an algorithm of complexity O(N6) to determine its first N coefficients. As a result, we have generated and analyzed series with more than 300 terms in both the high- and low-temperature regime. We quantify the effect of irrelevant variables to the scaling-amplitude functions. In particular, we find and quantify the breakdown of simple scaling, in the absence of irrelevant 1 scaling fields, arising first at order |T −Tc | 9/4, though high-low temperature symmetry is still preserved. At terms of order |T −Tc | 17/4 and beyond, this symmetry is no longer present. The short-distance terms are shown to have the form (T − Tc) p (log |T − Tc|) q with p ≥ q2. Conjectured exact expressions for some correlation functions and series coefficients in terms of elliptic theta functions also foreshadow future developments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations72
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207