Bosonisation as The Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation

The problem of strongly correlated electrons in one dimension attracted attention of condensed matter physicists since early 50’s. After the seminal paper of Tomonaga [1] who suggested the first soluble model in 1950, there were essential achievements reflected in papers by Luttinger [2] (1963) and Mattis and Lieb [3] (1963). A considerable contribution to the understanding of generic properties of the 1D electron liquid has been made by Dzyaloshinskii and Larkin [4] (1973) and Efetov and Larkin [5] (1976). Despite the fact that the main features of the 1D electron liquid were captured and described by the end of 70’s, the investigators felt dissatisfied with the rigour of the theoretical description. The most famous example is the paper by Haldane [6] (1981) where the author developed the fundamentals of a modern bosonisation technique, known as the operator approach. This paper became famous because the author has rigourously shown how to construct the Fermi creation/anihilation operators out of the Bose ones. The most recent example of such a dissatisfaction is the review by von Delft and Schoeller [7] (1998) who revised the approach to the bosonisation and came up with what they called constructive bosonisation.

Granular superconductors:from the nonlinear σ model to the Bose-Hubbard description

We modify a nonlinear σ model (NLσM) for the description of a granular disordered system in the presence of both the Coulomb repulsion and the Cooper pairing. We show that under certain controlled approximations the action of this model is reduced to the Ambegaokar-Eckern-Schön (AES) action, which is further reduced to the Bose-Hubbard (or “dirty-boson”) model with renormalized coupling constants. We obtain an effective action which is more general than the AES one but still simpler than the full NLσM action. This action can be applied in the region of parameters where the reduction to the AES or the Bose-Hubbard model is not justified. This action may lead to a different picture of the superconductor-insulator transition in two-dimensional systems.

Replication research's disturbing trend

Researchers express concern over a paucity of replications. In line with this, editorial policies of some leading marketing journals now encourage more replications. This article reports on an extension of a 1994 study to see whether these efforts have had an effect on the number of replication studies published in leading marketing journals. Results show that the replication rate has fallen to 1.2%, a decrease in the rate by half. As things now stand, practitioners should be skeptical about using the results published in marketing journals as hardly any of them have been successfully replicated, teachers should ignore the findings until they receive support via replications and researchers should put little stock in the outcomes of one-shot studies.

Comparison of two formulas used to calculate summarized retinal vessel calibers

PURPOSE: To compare the Parr-Hubbard and Knudtson formulas to calculate retinal vessel calibers and to examine the effect of omitting vessels on the overall result. METHODS: We calculated the central retinal arterial equivalent (CRAE) and central retinal venular equivalent (CRVE) according to the formulas described by Parr-Hubbard and Knudtson including the six largest retinal arterioles and venules crossing through a concentric ring segment (measurement zone) around the optic nerve head. Once calculated, we removed one arbitrarily selected artery and one arbitrarily selected vein and recalculated all outcome parameters again for (1) omitting one artery only, (2) omitting one vein only, and (3) omitting one artery and one vein. All parameters were compared against each other. RESULTS: Both methods showed good correlation (r for CRAE = 0.58; r for CRVE = 0.84), but absolute values for CRAE and CRVE were significantly different from each other when comparing both methods (p < 0.000001): CRAE had higher values for the Parr-Hubbard (165 [±16] μm) method compared with the Knudtson method (148 [±15] μm). In addition, CRAE and CRVE values dropped for both methods when omitting one arbitrarily selected vessel each (all p < 0.000001). Arteriovenous ratio (AVR) calculations showed a similar change for both methods when omitting one vessel each: AVR decreased when omitting one arteriole whereas it increased when omitting one venule. No change, however, was observed for AVR calculated with six or five vessel pairs each. CONCLUSIONS: Although the absolute value for CRAE and CRVE is changing significantly depending on the number of vessels included, AVR appears to be comparable as long as the same number of arterioles and venules is included.