Pith.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · arXiv:hep-ph/9709498 v4 · submitted 29 Sep 1997

"Lattice-Free" Simulations of Topological Defect Formation

Robert J. Scherrer, Alexander Vilenkin

The paper says

“This problem can be resolved by linearly interpolating the field values on the lattice, which gives results in good agreement with the continuum predictions.”

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

We examine simulations of the formation of domain walls, cosmic strings, and monopoles on a cubic lattice, in which the topological defects are assumed to lie at the zeros of a piecewise constant 1, 2, or 3 component Gaussian random field, respectively. We derive analytic expressions for the corresponding topological defect densities in the continuum limit and show that they fail to agree with simulation results, even when the fields are smoothed on small scales to eliminate lattice effects. We demonstrate that this discrepancy, which is related to a classic geometric fallacy, is due to the anisotropy of the cubic lattice, which cannot be eliminated by smoothing. This problem can be resolved by linearly interpolating the field values on the lattice, which gives results in good agreement with the continuum predictions. We use this procedure to obtain a lattice-free estimate (for Gaussian smoothing) of the fraction of the total length of string in the form of infinite strings: f∞ = 0.716 ± 0.015.

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 0.97

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.62 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.15 · randomized assignment 0.02 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.86 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v4). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
We examine simulations of the formation of domain walls, cosmic strings, and monopoles on a cubic lattice, in which the topological defects are assumed to lie at the zeros of a piecewise constant 1, 2, or 3 component Gaussian random field, respectively. method 0.64 0.83 0.04 asserted 0.93
We derive analytic expressions for the corresponding topological defect densities in the continuum limit and show that they fail to agree with simulation results, even when the fields are smoothed on small scales to eliminate lattice effects. result 0.96 0.95 0.20 asserted 1.00
We demonstrate that this discrepancy, which is related to a classic geometric fallacy, is due to the anisotropy of the cubic lattice, which cannot be eliminated by smoothing. interpretation 0.92 0.87 0.32 asserted 1.00
This problem can be resolved by linearly interpolating the field values on the lattice, which gives results in good agreement with the continuum predictions. method 0.82 0.91 0.37 asserted 0.97
We use this procedure to obtain a lattice-free estimate (for Gaussian smoothing) of the fraction of the total length of string in the form of infinite strings: $f_\infty = 0.716 \pm 0.015$. result 1.00 0.96 0.31 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 0.40 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.96

What was examined, and what was not

Sources read

  • arXiv listing abstract v4

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, 4,452 input tokens, $0.0002 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 6 Pith papers
How the literature uses it

5 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 citing it · 5 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 2 papers

Challenges and discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment