Pith.

High Energy Physics - Lattice · arXiv:hep-lat/9610016 v1 · submitted 15 Oct 1996

Lattice Monte Carlo Data versus Perturbation Theory

C. R. Allton

The paper says

“We find that this interpretation provides excellent agreement between lattice data and perturbation theory in g_0 corrected for lattice artifacts.”

from the abstract · picked out as the main claim by a classifier

Pith says

Pith has not reviewed this paper.

Get a Pith Review, $5

Reviews

Reviews by people

No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.

Request a human review

How Pith checks papers · The full audit of this paper

The paper

Abstract

The differences between lattice Monte Carlo data and perturbation theory are usually associated with the “bad” behaviour of the bare lattice coupling g_0 due to the effects of large (and unknown) higher order coefficients in the g_0 perturbative series. In this philosophy a new, renormalised coupling g' is defined with the aim of reducing the higher order coefficients of the perturbative series in g'. An improvement in the agreement between lattice data and this new perturbation series is generally observed. In this paper an alternative scenario is discussed where lattice artifacts are proposed as the cause of the disagreement between lattice data and the g_0-perturbative series. We find that this interpretation provides excellent agreement between lattice data and perturbation theory in g_0 corrected for lattice artifacts. We show that this viewpoint leads typically to an order of magnitude improvement in the agreement between lattice data and perturbation theory, compared to typical g' perturbation expansions. The success of this procedure leads to a determination of Lambda_MSbar^N_f=0 of 220 +- 20 MeV. Lattice data studied includes quenched values of the string tension, the hadronic scale r_0, the discrete beta function Delta\beta, M_rho, f_pi and the 1P-1S splitting in charmonium. The new 3-loop term of the lattice beta- function has been incorporated in this study. A discussion of the implication of this result for lattice calculations is presented.

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

How the main claim is stated: asserted 1.00

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.12 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.43 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.96 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v1). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
The differences between lattice Monte Carlo data and perturbation theory are usually associated with the ``bad'' behaviour of the bare lattice coupling g_0 due to the effects of large (and unknown) higher order coefficients in the g_0 perturbative series. background 1.00 0.05 0.03 asserted 0.77
In this philosophy a new, renormalised coupling g' is defined with the aim of reducing the higher order coefficients of the perturbative series in g'. background 0.99 0.09 0.02 asserted 0.97
An improvement in the agreement between lattice data and this new perturbation series is generally observed. background 0.96 0.12 0.04 asserted 0.78
In this paper an alternative scenario is discussed where lattice artifacts are proposed as the cause of the disagreement between lattice data and the g_0-perturbative series. contribution 0.93 0.24 0.09 hedged possibility 0.78
We find that this interpretation provides excellent agreement between lattice data and perturbation theory in g_0 corrected for lattice artifacts. result 0.99 0.96 0.60 asserted 1.00
We show that this viewpoint leads typically to an order of magnitude improvement in the agreement between lattice data and perturbation theory, compared to typical g' perturbation expansions. result 0.99 0.91 0.31 asserted 0.94
The success of this procedure leads to a determination of Lambda_MSbar^{N_f=0} of 220 +- 20 MeV. result 1.00 0.93 0.23 asserted 1.00
Lattice data studied includes quenched values of the string tension, the hadronic scale r_0, the discrete beta function Delta\beta, M_rho, f_pi and the 1P-1S splitting in charmonium. method 0.69 0.70 0.03 asserted 0.98
The new 3-loop term of the lattice beta- function has been incorporated in this study. method 0.76 0.62 0.02 asserted 1.00
A discussion of the implication of this result for lattice calculations is presented. interpretation 0.86 0.59 0.03 unclear 0.75

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 0.62 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.57

What was examined, and what was not

Sources read

  • arXiv listing abstract v1

Not examined

  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers

Levels run

  • P abstract

Not run

  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

How the labels were made

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 7,601 input tokens, $0.0003 reported.

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON

Cited by 10 Pith papers
How the literature uses it

7 arXiv papers cite this in 7 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers whose main result relates to this one's

Found among the papers closest to this one by title and main claim. Pith's classifier compared each pair's main results and a second model family confirmed the relation; checked against two further families, shown conflicts agreed 118 times in 120 and shown same results 218 times in 239. The quoted sentence is the other paper's main claim.

States the same result 1 paper

Papers citing it

Uses its method or tool 6 papers
Uses its data or values 1 paper

Challenges and discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment