MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210787966 · doi:10.1002/cpa.22040

Generalized TAP Free Energy

2022· article· en· W4210787966 on OpenAlexaff
Wei‐Kuo Chen, Dmitry Panchenko, Eliran Subag

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications on Pure and Applied Mathematics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSpin glassAnsatzReplicaSpinsMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider the mixed p‐spin mean‐field spin glass model with Ising spins and investigate its free energy in the spirit of the TAP approach, named after Thouless, Anderson, and Palmer [67]. More precisely, we define and compute the generalized TAP correction, and establish the corresponding generalized TAP representation for the free energy. In connection with physicists’ replica theory, we introduce the notion of generalized TAP states, which are the maximizers of the generalized TAP free energy, and show that their order parameters match the order parameter of the ancestor states in the Parisi ansatz. We compute the critical point equations of the TAP free energy that generalize the classical TAP equations for pure states. Furthermore, we give an exact description of the region where the generalized TAP correction is replica symmetric, in which case it coincides with the classical TAP correction, and show that Plefka's condition is necessary for this to happen. In particular, our result shows that the generalized TAP correction is not always replica symmetric on the points corresponding to the Edwards‐Anderson parameter. © 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

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)0.003
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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