Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 298

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The sphaleron strikes back: A response to objections to the sphaleron approximation

Arnold, Peter, McLerran, Larry·1988·Physical Review D

Abstract

The issue of sphaleron-induced baryon decay and various paradoxes related to the instanton method of computation are addressed. By various examples we argue that there is no contradiction between the instanton estimates and sphaleron estimates, and argue that for electroweak theory these estimates correspond to different approximations for distinct phenomena. We also investigate numerically the nature of the classical decay of a sphaleron in the (1+1)-dimensional Abelian Higgs model.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.37.1020

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 298

Metadata

Authors
Arnold, P., & McLerran, L.
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
1988-02-15
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
1020-1029
ISSN
0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2767912836
Cited by
298
References
2
FWCI
15.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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.