MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210515265 · doi:10.1007/s00220-021-04299-1

Melonic Large N Limit of 5-Index Irreducible Random Tensors

2022· article· en· W4210515265 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sylvain Carrozza, Sabine Harribey

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Mathematical Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaRadboud UniversiteitDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean CommissionGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRank (graph theory)Quartic functionLimit (mathematics)Tensor (intrinsic definition)SimplexIrreducible representationCombinatoricsTensor productMathematicsMathematical physicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We demonstrate that random tensors transforming under rank-5 irreducible representations of $$\mathrm {O}(N)$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>N</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> can support melonic large N expansions. Our construction is based on models with sextic (5-simplex) interaction, which generalize previously studied rank-3 models with quartic (tetrahedral) interaction (Benedetti et al. in Commun Math Phys 371:55, 2019. arXiv:1712.00249 ; Carrozza in JHEP 06:039, 2018. arXiv:1803.02496 ). Beyond the irreducible character of the representations, our proof relies on recursive bounds derived from a detailed combinatorial analysis of the Feynman graphs. Our results provide further evidence that the melonic limit is a universal feature of irreducible tensor models in arbitrary rank.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Mathematical PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207