Bibliographic record
Abstract
We undertake a systematic study of the $4$-dimensional $SU(N)$ $2$-index chiral gauge theories and investigate their faithful global symmetries and dynamics. These are a finite set of theories with fermions in the $2$-index symmetric and anti-symmetric representations, with no fundamentals, and they do not admit a large-$N$ limit. We employ a combination of perturbative and nonperturbative methods, enabling us to constrain their infrared (IR) phases. Specifically, we leverage the 't Hooft anomalies associated with continuous and discrete groups to eliminate a few scenarios. In some cases, the anomalies rule out the possibility of fermion composites. In other cases, the interplay between the continuous and discrete anomalies leads to multiple higher-order condensates, which inevitably form to match the anomalies. Further, we pinpoint the most probable symmetry-breaking patterns by searching for condensates that match the full set of anomalies resulting in the smallest number of IR degrees of freedom. Higher-loop $β$-function analysis suggests that a few theories may flow to a conformal fixed point.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".