MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Origin of symmetry breaking in the grasshopper model

2024· article· en· W4399288917 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern Formation
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilFlatiron HealthSimons Foundation
KeywordsGrasshopperSymmetry breakingSymmetry (geometry)Spontaneous symmetry breakingPhysicsTheoretical physicsMathematicsGeometryBiologyParticle physicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The planar grasshopper problem, originally introduced by Goulko and Kent [], is a striking example of a model with long-range isotropic interactions whose ground states break rotational symmetry. In this paper we analyze and explain the nature of this symmetry breaking with emphasis on the importance of dimensionality. Interestingly, rotational symmetry is recovered in three dimensions for small jumps, which correspond to the nonisotropic cogwheel regime of the two-dimensional problem. We discuss simplified models that reproduce the symmetry properties of the original system in <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><a:mi>N</a:mi></a:math> dimensions. For the full grasshopper model in two dimensions we obtain quantitative predictions for optimal perturbations of the disk. Our analytical results are confirmed by numerical simulations. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.339 · 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