MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102153213 · doi:10.1007/jhep04%282015%29093

Driven holographic CFTs

2015· article· en· W3102153213 on OpenAlexaff
Mukund Rangamani, Moshe Rozali, Anson W. C. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsObservableDissipationStatistical physicsOperator (biology)SpacetimeScalar fieldEntropy productionPhase transitionEntropy (arrow of time)CrossoverScalar (mathematics)Classical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: We study the dynamical evolution of strongly coupled field theories, initially in thermal equilibrium, under the influence of an external driving force. We model the field theory holographically using classical gravitational dynamics in an asymptotically AdS spacetime. The system is driven by a source for a (composite) scalar operator. We focus on a scenario where the external source is periodic in time and chart out the response of several observables. We find an interesting phase structure in the response as a function of the amplitude of the source and driving frequency. Specifically the system transitions from a dissipation dominated phase, via a dynamical crossover to a highly resonant amplification phase. The diagnostics of these phases include the response of the operator in question, entropy production, energy fluctuations, and the temporal change of entanglement entropy for small subsystems. We comment on evidence for a potential phase transition in the energy fluctuations of the system.

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 score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
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

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207