Origin of the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mi>S</mml:mi> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>9</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> <mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo> <mml:mi>S</mml:mi> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mi>S</mml:mi> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>6</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> </mml:math> symmetry breaking in the type IIB matrix model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We suggest a dynamical mechanism which explains why, in the supersymmetric Ishibashi-Kawai-Kitazawa-Tsuchiya matrix model, the S O ( 9 ) symmetry of the Lagrangian is spontaneously broken to S O ( 3 ) × S O ( 6 ) , allowing only three large classical spatial dimensions to emerge. The argument relies on the identification of D-strings as stable excitations of the matrices about the cosmological background and the absence of forces between parallel D-string excitations. A spatial dimension can only become large if the D-strings winding in that direction can annihilate. In the absence of forces, this requires the string-world sheets to intersect, a process which is highly suppressed if more than three dimensions of space are large. Implications for a recently proposed matrix cosmology scenario are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.542 | 0.558 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".