MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328052222 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/acc61e

Cosmic time evolution and propagator from a Yang–Mills matrix model

2023· article· en· W4328052222 on OpenAlexafffund
Joanna L. Karczmarek, Harold Steinacker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsPropagatorCOSMIC cancer databaseMatrix (chemical analysis)PhysicsMatrix modelMathematical physicsAstrophysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider a solution of a IKKT-type matrix model which can be considered as a 1+1-dimensional space-time with Minkowski signature and a Big Bounce (BB)-like singularity. A suitable i ε regularization of the Lorentzian matrix integral is proposed, which leads to the standard i ε -prescription for the effective field theory. In particular, the Feynman propagator is recovered locally for late times. This demonstrates that a causal structure and time evolution can emerge in the matrix model, even on non-trivial geometries. We also consider the propagation of modes through the BB, and observe an interesting correlation between the post-BB and pre-BB sheets, which reflects the structure of the brane in target space.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207