MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124641838 · doi:10.1007/jhep11%282017%29133

The S-matrix bootstrap. Part I: QFT in AdS

2017· article· en· W3124641838 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel F. Paulos, João Penedones, Jonathan Toledo, Balt C. van Rees, Pedro Vieira

Bibliographic record

VenueDurham Research Online (Durham University) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformal mapCurvatureHyperbolic spaceSpace (punctuation)Matrix (chemical analysis)Boundary (topology)Dimension (graph theory)Quantum field theoryPhysicsScalingMathematical analysisField (mathematics)MathematicsConformal field theoryMathematical physicsPure mathematicsGeometryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a strategy to study massive Quantum Field Theory (QFT) using conformal bootstrap methods. The idea is to consider QFT in hyperbolic space and study correlation functions of its boundary operators. We show that these are solutions of the crossing equations in one lower dimension. By sending the curvature radius of the background hyperbolic space to infinity we expect to recover flat-space physics. We explain that this regime corresponds to large scaling dimensions of the boundary operators, and discuss how to obtain the flat-space scattering amplitudes from the corresponding limit of the boundary correlators. We implement this strategy to obtain universal bounds on the strength of cubic couplings in 2D flat-space QFTs using 1D conformal bootstrap techniques. Our numerical results match precisely the analytic bounds obtained in our companion paper using S-matrix bootstrap techniques.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations74
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDurham Research Online (Durham University)Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207