MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3102987949 · doi:10.1007/jhep08(2020)115

Conformal four-point correlation functions from the operator product expansion

2020· article· en· W3102987949 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean-François Fortin, Valentina Prilepina, Witold Skiba

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueAspen Center for PhysicsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAntisymmetric relationConformal mapOperator product expansionLorentz transformationMathematicsPure mathematicsTensor productOperator (biology)Lorentz groupFormalism (music)Algebra over a fieldMathematical analysisMathematical physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We show how to compute conformal blocks of operators in arbitrary Lorentz representations using the formalism described in [1, 2] and present several explicit examples of blocks derived via this method. The procedure for obtaining the blocks has been reduced to (1) determining the relevant group theoretic structures and (2) applying appropriate predetermined substitution rules. The most transparent expressions for the blocks we find are expressed in terms of specific substitutions on the Gegenbauer polynomials. In our examples, we study operators which transform as scalars, symmetric tensors, two-index antisymmetric tensors, as well as mixed representations of the Lorentz group.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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