MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414086038 · doi:10.1007/jhep09(2025)095

Universal dynamics in non-orientable CFT2

2025· article· en· W4414086038 on OpenAlexafffund
Ioannis Tsiares

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCentral chargeConformal field theoryConformal mapScalar (mathematics)Partition function (quantum field theory)Virasoro algebraScalar fieldOperator product expansionRiemann hypothesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Two-dimensional conformal field theories (CFTs) defined on non-orientable Riemann surfaces obey consistency Cardy conditions analogous to those in the orientable case. We revisit those conditions for irrational theories with central charge c > 1 in the context of two-point functions of primaries on the Real Projective plane $$ {\mathbbm{RP}}^2 $$ RP 2 and the partition function on the Klein bottle $$ {\mathbbm{K}}^2 $$ K 2 . Using the irrational versions of the Virasoro fusion and modular kernels we derive universal expressions for the non-orientable CFT data at large conformal dimension, assuming a gap in the spectrum of scalar primaries. In particular, we derive asymptotic formulas at finite central charge for the averaged Light-Light-Heavy product C LLH × Γ H of OPE coefficients with the $$ {\mathbbm{RP}}^2 $$ RP 2 one-point function normalizations, as well as for the parity-weighted density of heavy scalar primaries (or equivalently the density of heavy $$ {\Gamma}_H^2 $$ Γ H 2 ). We discuss the gravitational interpretation of the results.

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)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→