Pith. Sign in

RECORD

A Simple Proof of the Non-Renormalization of the Chern-Simons Coupling

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 26 Oct 1999

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

The authors' main claim We give a very simple proof that the renormalization of the Chern-Simons coupling in the Wilsonian effective action is exhausted at one-loop.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDhep-th/9910200 (version 3)
Pith IDD3KXL4I3, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationHiroyuki Yamashita, Makoto Sakamoto. "A Simple Proof of the Non-Renormalization of the Chern-Simons Coupling." arXiv:hep-th/9910200 (1999). https://pith.science/paper/D3KXL4I3
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, 2,985 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.66 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.46 · compares with prior results 0.09 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

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

We give a very simple proof that the renormalization of the Chern-Simons coupling in the Wilsonian effective action is exhausted at one-loop. Our proof can apply to arbitrary 2+1-dimensional abelian as well as nonabelian gauge theories without a bare Chern-Simons coupling, including any non-renormalizable interactions and non-minimal couplings. Our proof reveals that small (but not large) gauge invariance is enough to ensure the absence of higher order corrections.

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 give a very simple proof that the renormalization of the Chern-Simons coupling in the Wilsonian effective action is exhausted at one-loop. contribution 0.63 0.96 0.94 asserted 1.00
s1 Our proof can apply to arbitrary 2+1-dimensional abelian as well as nonabelian gauge theories without a bare Chern-Simons coupling, including any non-renormalizable interactions and non-minimal couplings. contribution 0.63 0.81 0.10 asserted 0.73
s2 Our proof reveals that small (but not large) gauge invariance is enough to ensure the absence of higher order corrections. interpretation 0.87 0.91 0.25 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 1.00.

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 give a very simple proof that the renormalization of the Chern-Simons coupling in the Wilsonian effective action is exhausted at one-loop. Our proof can apply to arbitrary 2+1-dimensional abelian as well as nonabelian gauge theories without a bare Chern-Simons coupling, including any non-renormalizable interactions and non-minimal couplings. Our proof reveals that small (but not large) gauge invariance is enough to ensure the absence of higher order corrections.

Human review

Discussion

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