MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392515795 · doi:10.1007/jhep03(2024)028

Bounds on scattering of neutral Goldstones

2024· article· en· W4392515795 on OpenAlexafffund
Francesca Acanfora, Andrea L. Guerrieri, Kelian Häring, Denis Karateev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods in inverse problems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersUniversità degli Studi di PadovaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueNational Centres of Competence in Research SwissMAPSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsPhysicsScatteringParticle physicsTheoretical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract We study the space of 2 → 2 scattering amplitudes of neutral Goldstone bosons in four space-time dimensions. We establish universal bounds on the first two non-universal Wilson coefficients of the low energy Effective Field Theory (EFT) for such particles. We reconstruct the analytic, crossing-symmetric, and unitary amplitudes saturating our bounds, and we study their physical content. We uncover non-perturbative Regge trajectories by continuing our numerical amplitudes to complex spins. We then explore the consequence of additional constraints arising when we impose the knowledge about the EFT up to the cut-off scale. In the process, we improve on some aspects of the numerical S -matrix bootstrap technology for massless particles.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicNumerical methods in inverse problemsFrench-language works237,207