MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155540517 · doi:10.1002/cpa.22133

Shattering versus metastability in spin glasses

2023· article· en· W3155540517 on OpenAlexafffund
Gérard Ben Arous, Aukosh Jagannath

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications on Pure and Applied Mathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMetastabilityReplicaSpin glassWork (physics)Phase (matter)Mixing (physics)Symmetry (geometry)Spin (aerodynamics)Symmetry breakingCondensed matter physicsBoundary (topology)Phase boundaryPhysicsStatistical physicsMathematicsThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Our goal in this work is to better understand the relationship between replica symmetry breaking, shattering, and metastability. To this end, we study the static and dynamic behaviour of spherical pure p‐spin glasses above the replica symmetry breaking temperature . In this regime, we find that there are at least two distinct temperatures related to non‐trivial behaviour. First we prove that there is a regime of temperatures in which the spherical p‐spin model exhibits a shattering phase. Our results holds in a regime above but near . We then find that metastable states exist up to an even higher temperature as predicted by Barrat–Burioni–Mézard which is expected to be higher than the phase boundary for the shattering phase . We develop this work by first developing a Thouless–Anderson–Palmer decomposition which builds on the work of Subag. We then present a series of questions and conjectures regarding the sharp phase boundaries for shattering and slow mixing.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications on Pure and Applied MathematicsSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207