MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400767511 · doi:10.3390/sym16070914

Gauge Symmetry of Magnetic and Electric Two-Potentials with Magnetic Monopoles

2024· article· en· W4400767511 on OpenAlexaff
R. R. Cuzinatto, P. J. Pompeia, M. de Montigny

Bibliographic record

VenueSymmetry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsPhysicsSpinorMagnetic monopoleMassless particleGauge theoryIntroduction to gauge theoryGauge symmetryScalar (mathematics)Symmetry (geometry)Conformal symmetryQuantum electrodynamicsConformal mapMagnetic fieldMathematical descriptions of the electromagnetic fieldTensor (intrinsic definition)Gauge (firearms)Mathematical physicsTheoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsGauge anomalyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We generalize the U(1) gauge transformations of electrodynamics by means of an analytical extension of their parameter space and observe that this leads naturally to two gauge potentials, one electric, one magnetic, which permit the writing of local Lagrangians describing elementary particles with electric and magnetic charges. Gauge invariance requires a conformal transformation of the metric tensor. We apply this approach, which borrows from Utiyama’s methodology, to a model with a massless scalar field and a model with a massless spinor field. We observed that for spinor models non-symmetrized Lagrangians can enable the existence of magnetic monopoles, but this is not possible with symmetrized Lagrangian. Such restrictions do not occur for spinless fields, but the model does not allow spin-one fields interacting with monopoles.

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 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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymmetrySame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207