MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6891694132 · doi:10.48448/b64t-7j87

Numerical Loop-Integration Methods for Thermal Field Theory

2021· other· en· W6891694132 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of the Fraser Valley
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal quantum field theoryPropagatorQuantum field theoryFeynman diagramBeta function (physics)ThermalField (mathematics)Relationship between string theory and quantum field theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The basic structure of quantum field theory that is used to describe the Standard Model of fundamental interactions of nature is usually formulated for zero temperature. However, the effects of temperature are extremely important for understanding a number of physical processes such as the electro-weak phase transition and quark-gluon plasma. Thermal field theory is the extension of quantum field theory to a non-zero temperature environment and is achieved by modifying the propagators in loop integrations represented by Feynman diagrams. The Python program pySecDec numerically calculates dimensionally-regularized loop integrals in quantum field theory using the sector decomposition approach. It is shown how pySecDec can be applied to thermal field theory numerical calculations using modifications within the Matsubara formalism. Using the formulated algorithm, a 2-point correlation function (such as those occurring in QCD correlation functions) at finite temperature can be numerically calculated for a variety of spacetime dimensions.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designSimulation or modeling · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207