MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095138568

Preprint typeset in JHEP style- HYPER VERSION McGILL-14-04 Caustic Formation in Tachyon Effective Field Theories

2004· article· en· W7095138568 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
Topicadvanced mathematical theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTachyonTachyon condensationTachyonic fieldCaustic (mathematics)Field (mathematics)Context (archaeology)String (physics)String field theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Certain configurations of D-branes, for example wrong dimensional branes or the brane-antibrane system, are unstable to decay. This instability is described by the appearance of a tachyonic mode in the spectrum of open strings ending on the brane(s). The decay of these unstable systems is described by the rolling of the tachyon field from the unstable maximum to the minimum of its potential. We analytically study the dynamics of the inhomogeneous tachyon field as it rolls towards the true vacuum of the theory in the context of several different tachyon effective actions. We find that the vacuum dynamics of these theories is remarkably similar and in particular we show that in all cases the tachyon field forms caustics where second and higher derivatives of the field blow up. The formation of caustics signals a pathology in the evolution since each of the effective actions considered is not reliable in the vicinity of a caustic. We speculate that the formation of caustics is an artifact of truncating the tachyon action, which should contain all orders of derivatives acting on the field, to a finite number of derivatives. Finally, we consider inhomogeneous solutions in p-adic string theory, a toy model of the bosonic tachyon which contains derivatives of all orders acting on the field. For a large class of initial conditions

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicadvanced mathematical theoriesFrench-language works237,207