Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Schema for Duality, Illustrated by Bosonization

De Haro, Sebastian, Butterfield, Jeremy·2018·Foundations of Mathematics and Physics One Century After Hilbert
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-64813-2_12
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this paper we present a schema for describing dualities between physical theories (Sects. 2 and 3), and illustrate it in detail with the example of bosonization: a boson-fermion duality in two-dimensional quantum field theory (Sects. 4 and 5). The schema develops proposals in De Haro (Space and Time after Quantum Gravity, 2016 [15]; Duality and Physical Equivalence, 2016a [16]): these proposals include construals of notions related to duality, like representation, model, symmetry and interpretation. The aim of the schema is to give a more precise criterion for duality than has so far been considered. The bosonization example, or boson-fermion duality, has the feature of being simple yet rich enough to illustrate the most relevant aspects of our schema, which also apply to more sophisticated dualities. The richness of the example consists, mainly, in its concern with two non-trivial quantum field theories: including massive Thirring-sine-Gordon duality, and non-abelian bosonization. This prompts two comparisons with the recent philosophical literature on dualities. (a) Unlike the standard cases of duality in quantum field theory and string theory, where only specific simplifying limits of the theories are explicitly known, the boson-fermion duality is known to hold exactly. This exactness can be exhibited explicitly. (b) The bosonization example illustrates both the cases of isomorphic and non-isomorphic models: which we believe the literature on dualities has not so far discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-319-64813-2_12

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. R. Carnap, Meaning and Necessity (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1947)
  2. S. De Haro, Duality and Physical Equivalence. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/12279 , the title of this preprint has changed (2016a)
  3. S. De Haro, N. Teh, J.N. Butterfield, Comparing dualities and gauge symmetries. Stud. Hist. Philos. Mod. Phys. 59, 68–80 (2017) · DOI
  4. N. Dewar, Sophistication about symmetries, forthcoming in British Journal for the Philosophy of Science; available at: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/12469 (2016)
  5. G. Frege, Über Sinn und Bedeutung, Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, pp. 25–50; translated as On Sense and reference, ed. by P.T. Geach and M. Black (1960), Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, (Blackwell, Oxford, 1892)
  6. I. Grattan-Guinness, A sideways look at Hilbert’s twenty-three problems of 1900. Not. Am. Math. Soc. 47, 752–757 (2000)
  7. J. von Neumann, Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, English translation published in 1955 (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1932)

Cited by

See all 14

Metadata

Authors
De Haro, S., & Butterfield, J.
Venue
Foundations of Mathematics and Physics One Century After Hilbert
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published
2018
Pages
305-376
DOI
10.1007/978-3-319-64813-2_12
Cited by
14
References
60
Language
en
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.