{"paper":{"title":"Anomalies, gauge field topology, and the lattice","arxiv_id":"1007.5502","primary_cat":"hep-lat","submitted_at":"2010-07-30T17:49:59+00:00","version_compiled":"v4"},"notice":"Every quoted sentence is the authors' text from the arXiv listing abstract. Labels and probabilities are the outputs of classifier-1.13-20260917 on the question bank abstract-p1-20260923, exactly as returned. No sentence in this record was written by a language model.","schema":"pith.compiled-record/v0","status":"compiled","abstract":{"source":"arXiv listing abstract v4","sentences":[{"i":0,"p":0.71,"id":"s0","own":true,"role":"contribution","text":"Motivated by the connection between gauge field topology and the axial anomaly in fermion currents, I use the fourth power of the naive Dirac operator to define a local lattice measure of topological charge.","hedge":{"p":0.99,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.93,"main_claim_p":0.08,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.33,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.29,"result":0.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.71,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":1,"p":0.71,"id":"s1","own":true,"role":"result","text":"For smooth gauge fields this reduces to the usual topological density.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.59,"main_claim_p":0.04,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.13,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.12,"result":0.71,"background":0.02,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.09,"interpretation":0.06}},{"i":2,"p":0.84,"id":"s2","own":true,"role":"result","text":"For typical gauge field configurations in a numerical simulation, however, quantum fluctuations dominate, and the sum of this density over the system does not generally give an integer winding.","hedge":{"p":0.86,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.74,"main_claim_p":0.17,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.23,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.84,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.16,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":3,"p":0.89,"id":"s3","own":true,"role":"result","text":"On cooling with respect to the Wilson gauge action, instanton like structures do emerge.","hedge":{"p":0.99,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.81,"main_claim_p":0.08,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.04,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.09,"result":0.89,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.02,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":4,"p":0.95,"id":"s4","own":true,"role":"result","text":"As cooling proceeds, these objects tend shrink and finally \"fall through the lattice.\" Modifying the action can block the shrinking at the expense of a loss of reflection positivity.","hedge":{"p":0.89,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.65,"main_claim_p":0.09,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.09,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.01,"result":0.95,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.03,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.01}},{"i":5,"p":0.91,"id":"s5","own":true,"role":"interpretation","text":"The cooling procedure is highly sensitive to the details of the initial steps, suggesting that quantum fluctuations induce a small but fundamental ambiguity in the definition of topological susceptibility.","hedge":{"p":0.96,"label":"hedged_possibility"},"own_p":0.81,"main_claim_p":0.61,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.16,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.06,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.03,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.91}}]},"compiled":{"main_claim":{"p":1.0,"text":"The cooling procedure is highly sensitive to the details of the initial steps, suggesting that quantum fluctuations induce a small but fundamental ambiguity in the definition of topological susceptibility.","location":"abstract s5","hedge_strength":{"p":0.96,"label":"hedged possibility"}},"provenance":{"route":{"via":"OpenRouter","model":"classifier-1.13","endpoint":"https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/systemone","provider":"TypeSafe"},"packing":"one request per paper","requests":1,"input_tokens":4898,"cost_usd_reported":0.000206},"compiled_at":"2026-09-23","bank_version":"abstract-p1-20260923","model_version":"classifier-1.13-20260917","abstract_states":{"claims_first":0.03,"states_limitation":0.94,"human_participants":0.01,"controlled_comparison":0.04,"randomized_assignment":0.01,"states_quantitative_result":0.05,"compares_with_prior_results":0.33,"mentions_code_or_data_availability":0.02},"evidential_basis":{"p":0.98,"value":"simulation or computation","probabilities":{"argument":0.02,"literature":0.0,"proof_or_derivation":0.0,"analysis_of_existing_data":0.0,"observation_or_experiment":0.0,"simulation_or_computation":0.98}},"contribution_type":{"p":0.58,"value":"simulation study","probabilities":{"review":0.0,"method_or_tool":0.39,"empirical_study":0.0,"simulation_study":0.58,"theoretical_result":0.03,"dataset_or_benchmark":0.0,"position_or_commentary":0.0}},"contribution_statement":{"p":1.0,"text":"Motivated by the connection between gauge field topology and the axial anomaly in fermion currents, I use the fourth power of the naive Dirac operator to define a local lattice measure of topological charge.","location":"abstract s0"}},"coverage":{"tier":"abstract","levels_run":["P abstract"],"not_examined":["full text","figures and tables","references and citing sentences","relations to other papers"],"sources_read":["arXiv listing abstract v4"],"levels_not_run":["S sections","T body sentences","C citations","R cross-paper relations"],"sentences_examined":6,"sentences_in_abstract":6},"measured_accuracy":{"url":"https://pith.science/accuracy","measured_on":"2026-10-02","method":"two independent model families labelled a fresh random sample blind; the figure is how often the published label matches their consensus","sentence_role_agreement":0.92,"main_claim_agreement":0.908,"typed_citation_agreement":0.933,"typed_citation_agreement_95_interval":[0.917,0.945],"review_comments_accurate":0.758,"review_comments_accurate_95_interval":[0.684,0.82],"review_caught_admitted_error_found_or_related":0.448}}