Pith. Sign in

RECORD

D-branes on Calabi-Yau manifolds and helices

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 24 Oct 2000

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

The authors' main claim We conjecture a new procedure which improves computationally the McKay correspondence and prove it in a non trivial example.

how it is stated · asserted 0.57 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDhep-th/0010217 (version 3)
Pith IDSWXWGIAM, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAlessandro Tomasiello. "D-branes on Calabi-Yau manifolds and helices." arXiv:hep-th/0010217 (2000). https://pith.science/paper/SWXWGIAM
Claim paper

The compiled record

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. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,893 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.05 · states limitation 0.18 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.06 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.38 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v3. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We investigate further on the correspondence between branes on a Calabi-Yau in the large volume limit and in the orbifold limit. We conjecture a new procedure which improves computationally the McKay correspondence and prove it in a non trivial example. We point out the relevance of helices and try to draw some general conclusions about Beilinson theorem and McKay correspondence.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We investigate further on the correspondence between branes on a Calabi-Yau in the large volume limit and in the orbifold limit. contribution 0.66 0.78 0.08 asserted 0.68
s1 We conjecture a new procedure which improves computationally the McKay correspondence and prove it in a non trivial example. contribution 0.92 0.92 0.46 asserted 0.57
s2 We point out the relevance of helices and try to draw some general conclusions about Beilinson theorem and McKay correspondence. interpretation 0.68 0.80 0.23 hedged possibility 0.36

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.62 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.97.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v3
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

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We investigate further on the correspondence between branes on a Calabi-Yau in the large volume limit and in the orbifold limit. We conjecture a new procedure which improves computationally the McKay correspondence and prove it in a non trivial example. We point out the relevance of helices and try to draw some general conclusions about Beilinson theorem and McKay correspondence.

Human review
References
How the literature uses it

4 arXiv papers cite this in 4 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 · 3 sentences without a confident label

Cites it as background 1 paper

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.