MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Symmetric Satellite Swarms and Choreographic Crystals

2016· article· en· W333395213 on OpenAlexafffund
Latham Boyle, Jun Yong Khoo, Kendrick M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceGovernment of Canada
KeywordsChoreographyConstruct (python library)Symmetry (geometry)Theoretical physicsDegree (music)SatelliteNatural (archaeology)PhysicsComputer scienceOrder (exchange)DanceGeometryMathematicsAstronomyGeologyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Letter, we introduce a natural dynamical analogue of crystalline order, which we call choreographic order. In an ordinary (static) crystal, a high degree of symmetry may be achieved through a careful arrangement of the fundamental repeated elements. In the dynamical analogue, a high degree of symmetry may be achieved by having the fundamental elements perform a carefully choreographed dance. For starters, we show how to construct and classify all symmetric satellite constellations. Then we explain how to generalize these ideas to construct and classify choreographic crystals more broadly. We introduce a quantity, called the "choreography" of a given configuration. We discuss the possibility that some (naturally occurring or artificial) many-body or condensed-matter systems may exhibit choreographic order, and suggest natural experimental signatures that could be used to identify and characterize such systems.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207