MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advances in Fundamental Physics: Prelude to Paradigm Shift, 11th International Symposium Honoring Noted Mathematical Physicist Jean-Pierre Vigier

2019· article· en· W4238139784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Science and Diplomacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of everything (philosophy)String theoryQuantum gravityParadigm shiftEinsteinSurpriseTheoretical physicsPhysicistPhysicsEpistemologyQuantumPhilosophyQuantum mechanicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREFACE The 11th international symposium, Advances in Fundamental Physics, Prelude to Paradigm Shift honoring noted mathematical physicist Jean-Pierre Vigier, was held Monday, 6th August to Thursday, August 9 th , 2018 in Liège, Belgium. The Vigier series began in 1995, with the first of two conferences held at York University in Toronto, Canada. It was one of a handful of such series, including CASYS, PIRT and ANPA, which emerged in the last decades of the 20 th -century to cover areas of fundamental physics which at that time had no obvious outlet for discussion. These are vital areas for discussion now, but at the time, particle physics was thought solved by string theory and supersymmetry, and gravity by various approaches to quantizing general relativity. A surprise may occur with the looming experimental awakening of the imminent paradigm shift; current thinking, for all practical purposes, insists that gravity must be quantized. This arises from the current belief that the quantum mechanical stochastic foam is the impenetrable basement of reality. String theory, an evolution of Kaluza-Klein theory, has been developed as the putative theory of quantum gravity; but there is no a priori reason that gravity must be quantized:

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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

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 communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicInternational Science and DiplomacyFrench-language works237,207