Screen a table
Arithmetic screens for a published row, with conditional rung certificates and independent full-potential witness checks.
Control names are kept as they appear in the application. Start with a reference, change one input at a time, and retain the assumptions with your result.
What this tool is for
Use this to check whether a proposed SU(7) row is compatible with the implemented arithmetic before doing a broader calculation. It also provides access to the certificate dossier. Read which question each certificate answers: a fixed-potential global minimum and a conditional ceiling for a moment relaxation are different mathematical statements.
First steps
- Type the row's two observables.
- Read the mod-6 law, the K invariant and the arithmetic comb.
- Open Conditional rung bounds and check the seed, coupling and Higgs-mass window before using a ceiling.
- Compare the archived full-Fourier witnesses: a stationary point may have a deeper competing vacuum.
Controls and inputs
| Control | Meaning | Try this |
|---|---|---|
| Row inputs | The observables or arithmetic quantities labelled by the screen. Preserve the source's units and rounding when entering a printed row. | Load a listed row before typing an alternative. |
| Gauge seed, coupling and mass window | The conventions conditioning the arithmetic and bound comparisons. | Read them beside a certificate before comparing its ceiling with another result. |
| Save certificate buttons | Download the archived evidence, assumptions and associated checks as JSON. | Save a bundle when recording a result so its scope travels with the number. |
Reading the results
| Result | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Arithmetic laws and K invariant | Consistency screens within the stated model reduction. A failed screen identifies the stated mismatch; a passed screen leaves later tests open. |
| KK comb | The allowed arithmetic spacing displayed in squared mass. It should not be read as equally spaced masses. |
| Formal and interval evidence | The dossier distinguishes exact algebra, certificates for ten fixed one-phase potentials, conditional moment ceilings and separate numerical witness comparisons. |
The interval certificates bound a small-angle moment relaxation under the stated conventions. They do not certify a ceiling for the full potential. The separate vacuum checks compare numerically located extrema with Fourier-tail errors; an observed surviving witness is not an exhaustive optimum.
Worked example
Read a certificate without enlarging its claim
- Load one archived row and read all three screens.
- Open the conditional bound information and record the seed and mass window.
- Compare a full-potential witness with one labelled as having a deeper competing vacuum.
- Save the evidence bundle and follow the attribution link.
What to expect: A stationary point can pass one test while failing the global-vacuum comparison. The exported assumptions explain which conclusion can be reused.
Scope and limitations
- A moment-relaxation ceiling is not a universal ceiling for full-potential vacua.
- Numerically checked witnesses do not establish exhaustive optimality.
- Mathematical certificates for the implemented potential do not resolve the outstanding physical gauge-determinant choice or establish scientific novelty.
If something is unclear
A printed row fails a screen.
Check rounding intervals, units and seed first, then read the specific failed relation. Do not infer that an entire paper is wrong from one mismatch.
A stationary witness has a lower competing vacuum.
Keep the stationarity result but withdraw the claim that this witness is the global vacuum.
Terms used here
Sources and attribution
Current instrument guide. Archived editions retain their own scope.
Back to top