MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288088887 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.12158

Combinatorics of the geometry of Wilson loop diagrams II: Grassmann\n necklaces, dimensions, and denominators

2019· preprint· en· W4288088887 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Susama Agarwala, Siân Fryer, Karen Yeats

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsDiagramGrassmannianPropagatorLoop (graph theory)Ideal (ethics)MathematicsDimension (graph theory)NecklaceProduct (mathematics)Scattering amplitudeFeynman diagramPure mathematicsCombinatoricsMathematical physicsGeometryScatteringPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wilson loop diagrams are an important tool in studying scattering amplitudes\nof SYM $N=4$ theory and are known by previous work to be associated to\npositroids. In this paper we study the structure of the associated positroids,\nas well as the structure of the denominator of the integrand defined by each\ndiagram. We give an algorithm to derive the Grassmann necklace of the\nassociated positroid directly from the Wilson loop diagram, and a recursive\nproof that the dimension of these cells is thrice the number of propagators in\nthe diagram. We also show that the ideal generated by the denominator in the\nintegrand is the radical of the ideal generated by the product of Grassmann\nnecklace minors.\n

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.134 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicCoding theory and cryptographyFrench-language works237,207