MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407720661 · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.18.2.060

Bootstrapping frustrated magnets: the fate of the chiral ${\rm O}(N)\times {\rm O}(2)$ universality class

2025· article· lv· W4407720661 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marten Reehorst, Slava Rychkov, Benoit Sirois, Balt C. van Rees

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesEuropean Research CouncilUK Research and InnovationSimons Foundation
KeywordsUniversality (dynamical systems)Renormalization groupMagnetBootstrapping (finance)PhysicsCombinatoricsCondensed matter physicsMathematical physicsMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study multiscalar theories with \text{O}(N) × \text{O}(2) O ( N ) × O ( 2 ) symmetry. These models have a stable fixed point in d d dimensions if N N is greater than some critical value N_c(d) N c ( d ) . Previous estimates of this critical value from perturbative and non-perturbative renormalization group methods have produced mutually incompatible results. We use numerical conformal bootstrap methods to constrain N_c(d) N c ( d ) for 3 ≤ d < 4 3 ≤ d < 4 . Our results show that N_c> 3.78 N c > 3.78 for d = 3 d = 3 . This favors the scenario that the physically relevant models with N = 2,3 N = 2 , 3 in d=3 d = 3 do not have a stable fixed point, indicating a first-order transition. Our result exemplifies how conformal windows can be rigorously constrained with modern numerical bootstrap algorithms.

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)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
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 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207