Absence of SO(4) quantum criticality in Dirac semimetals at two-loop order
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence for relativistic quantum criticality of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity in two-dimensional Dirac fermion systems has been found in large-scale quantum Monte Carlo simulations. However, the corresponding ($2+1$)-dimensional Gross--Neveu--Yukawa field theory with $N_f=2$ four-component Dirac fermions coupled to two triplets of order parameters does not exhibit a renormalization group fixed point at one-loop order. Instead, the theory only features a critical point for a large or very small fractional number of fermion flavors $N_f$, which disappears for a broad range of flavor numbers around the physical case, $N_f=2$, due to fixed-point annihilation. This raises the question on how to explain the observed scaling collapse in the quantum Monte Carlo data. Here, we extend previous renormalization-group analyses by studying a generalized model at two-loop order in $4-ε$ spacetime dimensions. We determine the $ε$ correction to the upper and lower critical flavor numbers for the fixed-point annihilation and find that they both go towards the physical case $N_f=2$. However, this only happens very slowly, such that an extrapolation to $ε=1$ still suggests the absence of criticality in $2+1$ dimensions. Thereby, we consolidate the finding that the continuum field theory does not feature a stable renormalization-group fixed point and no true quantum criticality would be expected for the considered system. We briefly discuss a possible reconciliation in terms of a complex conformal field theory. Further, we also explore the fixed-point structure in an enlarged theory space and identify a candidate stable fixed-point solution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".