MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117078859

Gauging Open EFTs from the top down

2025· article· W7117078859 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Greg Kaplanek, Maria Mylova, Andrew J. Tolley

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueScience and Technology Facilities CouncilMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyGovernment of Canada
KeywordsBRST quantizationGauge fixingGauge theoryGauge symmetryIntroduction to gauge theoryQuantum gauge theorySupersymmetric gauge theoryPath integral formulationGlobal symmetryHiggs field
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present explicit top-down calculations of Open EFTs for gauged degrees of freedom with a focus on the effects of gauge fixing. Starting from the in-in contour with two copies of the action, we integrate out the charged matter in various $U(1)$ gauge theories to obtain the Feynman-Vernon influence functional for the photon, or, in the case of symmetry breaking, for the photon and Stückelberg fields. The influence functional is defined through a quantum path integral, which -- as is always the case when quantizing gauge degrees of freedom -- contains redundancies that must be eliminated via a gauge-fixing procedure. We implement the BRST formalism in this setting. The in-in boundary conditions break the two copies of BRST symmetry down to a single diagonal copy. Nevertheless the single diagonal BRST is sufficient to ensure that the influence functional is itself gauge invariant under two copies of gauge symmetries, retarded and advanced, regardless of the choice of state or symmetry-breaking phase. We clarify how this is consistent with the decoupling limit where the global advanced symmetry is generically broken by the state. We illustrate our results with several examples: a gauge field theory analogue of the Caldeira-Leggett model, spinor QED with fermions integrated out, scalar QED in a thermal state, the Abelian Higgs-Kibble model in the spontaneously broken state with the Higgs integrated out, and Abelian Higgs-Kibble model coupled to a charged bath in a symmetry-broken phase. The latter serves as an example of an open system for Stückelberg/Goldstone fields.

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)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207