MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415251256 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.18285

Cardy limit of the 3d superconformal index

2025· preprint· en· W4415251256 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arash Arabi Ardehali, Mathieu Boisvert, Shehab Hossam Fadda

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
KeywordsModuli spaceLimit (mathematics)FactorizationModuliSpace (punctuation)Field (mathematics)Gauge theoryGauge (firearms)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the superconformal index $Z(q)$ of 3d $\mathcal{N}=2$ gauge theories in Cardy-like limits $β= \log \tfrac{1}{q} \to 0^+$, extending techniques recently developed in the 4d $\mathcal{N}=1$ context. For theories with vectorlike matter content we find on the first sheet ($q \to 1$) that $Z(q) \sim β^{-\#}$, where the exponent $\#$ is determined by a $multiscale\ decomposition$ of the BPS moduli space appearing in the localization formula for the index. On the second sheet ($q \to e^{2πi})$ we find $Z(q) \sim e^{\#/ β}$, and that the long-standing puzzle of apparent gauge-enhancing saddles is resolved (in the absence of Chern--Simons couplings) via a novel $Lorentzian\ factorization$ formula that establishes complete screening. A key insight is the use of $Poisson\ resummation$, which streamlines the asymptotic analysis, sharpens the link to Kaluza--Klein effective field theory, and provides a dual description of parts of the BPS moduli space in terms of punctured surfaces. The Lorentzian factorization formula also emerges from Poisson resummation, though applied after a contour crossing in moduli space. This, in turn, hints at a correspondence between 3d monopoles and vortices via 2d duality.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207