MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403884720 · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.18.5.161

Crystallography, group cohomology, and Lieb–Schultz–Mattis constraints

2025· preprint· en· W4403884720 on OpenAlexafffund
Chunxiao Liu, Weicheng Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersStewart Blusson Quantum Matter Institute, University of British ColumbiaGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsCohomologyGroup (periodic table)PhysicsTheoretical physicsPure mathematicsMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compute the mod-2 cohomology ring for three-dimensional (3D) space groups and establish a connection between them and the lattice structure of crystals with space group symmetry. This connection allows us to obtain a complete set of Lieb-Schultz-Mattis constraints, specifying the conditions under which a unique, symmetric, gapped ground state cannot exist in 3D lattice magnets. We associate each of these constraints with an element in the third mod-2 cohomology of the space group, when the internal symmetry acts on-site and its projective representations are classified by powers of \mathbb{Z}_2 ℤ 2 . We demonstrate the relevance of our results to the study of U(1) U ( 1 ) quantum spin liquids on the 3D pyrochlore lattice. We determine, through anomaly matching, the symmetry fractionalization patterns of both electric and magnetic charges, extending previous results from projective symmetry group classifications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost PhysicsSame topicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207