RECORD
A note on the interactions of compactified D-branes
High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 7 Nov 1997
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim We show that in certain cases the amplitude is independent on whether the D-strings are compactified or not.
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
The abstract, sentence by sentence
We compute the vacuum one loop amplitude for two D-strings at an angle compactified on $T^2$ as a function of the transverse separation and the winding numbers. We show that in certain cases the amplitude is independent on whether the D-strings are compactified or not.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | We compute the vacuum one loop amplitude for two D-strings at an angle compactified on $T^2$ as a function of the transverse separation and the winding numbers. | contribution 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.11 | asserted 0.99 |
| s1 | We show that in certain cases the amplitude is independent on whether the D-strings are compactified or not. | result 1.00 | 0.94 | 0.50 | asserted 0.99 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
We compute the vacuum one loop amplitude for two D-strings at an angle compactified on $T^2$ as a function of the transverse separation and the winding numbers. We show that in certain cases the amplitude is independent on whether the D-strings are compactified or not.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.