MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105764270

Holonomy spin foam models: Asymptotic geometry of the partition function

2013· article· en· W3105764270 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNarodowe Centrum NaukiInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPartition function (quantum field theory)Spin foamHolonomyImmirzi parameterCurvatureMathematicsPartition (number theory)Boundary (topology)Spin networkSpinsGeometryMathematical analysisLoop quantum gravityPhysicsCombinatoricsQuantum mechanicsQuantumQuantum gravity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the asymptotic geometry of the spin foam partition function for a large class of models, including the models of Barrett and Crane, Engle, Pereira, Rovelli and Livine, and, Freidel and Krasnov. The asymptotics is taken with respect to the boundary spins only, no assumption of large spins is made in the interior. We give a sufficient criterion for the existence of the partition function. We find that geometric boundary data is suppressed unless its interior continuation satisfies certain accidental curvature constraints. This means in particular that most Regge manifolds are suppressed in the asymptotic regime. We discuss this explicitly for the case of the configurations arising in the 3-3 Pachner move. We identify the origin of these accidental curvature constraints as an incorrect twisting of the face amplitude upon introduction of the Immirzi parameter and propose a way to resolve this problem, albeit at the price of losing the connection to the SU(2) boundary Hilbert space. The key methodological innovation that enables these results is the introduction of the notion of wave front sets, and the adaptation of tools for their study from micro local analysis to the case of spin foam partition functions.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.290
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations35
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society)Same topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207