MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3174264447 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2021)164

AdS bulk locality from sharp CFT bounds

2021· preprint· en· W3174264447 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Caron-Huot, Dalimil Mazáč, Leonardo Rastelli, David Simmons–Duffin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAlfred P. Sloan FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConjectureTRACE (psycholinguistics)Space (punctuation)Limit (mathematics)Matrix (chemical analysis)Conformal field theoryPhysicsScalingSpectrum (functional analysis)Conformal mapMathematical physicsScaling limitSpectral gapDispersion (optics)Field (mathematics)MathematicsCombinatoricsPure mathematicsMathematical analysisQuantum mechanicsGeometryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is a long-standing conjecture that any CFT with a large central charge and a large gap ∆gap in the spectrum of higher-spin single-trace operators must be dual to a local effective field theory in AdS. We prove a sharp form of this conjecture by deriving numerical bounds on bulk Wilson coefficients in terms of ∆gap using the conformal bootstrap. Our bounds exhibit the scaling in ∆gap expected from dimensional analysis in the bulk. Our main tools are dispersive sum rules that provide a dictionary between CFT dispersion relations and S-matrix dispersion relations in appropriate limits. This dictionary allows us to apply recently-developed flat-space methods to construct positive CFT functionals. We show how AdS4 naturally resolves the infrared divergences present in 4D flat-space bounds. Our results imply the validity of twice-subtracted dispersion relations for any S-matrix arising from the flat-space limit of AdS/CFT.

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)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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