5d to 3d compactifications and discrete anomalies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract Much insight into the dynamics of quantum field theories can be gained by studying the relationship between field theories in different dimensions. An interesting observation is that when two theories are related by dimensional reduction on a compact surface, their ’t Hooft anomalies corresponding to continuous symmetries are also related: the anomaly polynomial of the lower-dimensional theory can be obtained by integrating that of the higher-dimensional one on the compact surface. Naturally, this relation only holds if both theories are even dimensional. This raises the question of whether similar relations can also hold for the case of anomalies in discrete symmetries, which might be true even in odd dimensions. The natural generalization to discrete symmetries is that the anomaly theories, associated with the lower and higher dimensional theories, would be related by reduction on the compact surface. We explore this idea for compactifications of 5d superconformal field theories (SCFTs) to 3d on Riemann surfaces with global-symmetry fluxes. In this context, it can be used both as a check for these compactification constructions and for discovering new anomalies in the 5d SCFTs. This opens the way to applying the same idea of dimensional reduction of the anomaly theory to more general types of compactifications.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".