MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392771646 · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2024)219

Multicollinear singularities in celestial CFT

2024· article· en· W4392771646 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Ball, Yangrui Hu, Sabrina Pasterski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsGravitational singularityMathematical physicsTheoretical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsParticle physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract The purpose of this paper is to study the holomorphic multicollinear limit of (celestial) amplitudes and use it to further investigate the double residue condition for (hard celestial) amplitudes and the celestial operator product expansion. We first set up the notion of holomorphic multicollinear limits of amplitudes and derive the 3-collinear splitting functions for Yang-Mills theory, Einstein gravity, and massless ϕ 3 theory. In particular, we find that in ϕ 3 theory the celestial 3-OPE contains a term with a branch cut. This explicit example confirms that branch cuts can obstruct the double residue condition for hard celestial amplitudes, which is the underlying cause of the celestial Jacobi identities not holding for certain theories. This addresses an ongoing debate in the literature about associativity of the celestial OPEs and concretely demonstrates a new (multi-particle) term in the celestial OPE coming from the multi-particle channel in the amplitudes.

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)0.004
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 score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→