1. Scope, Claim Status, and What This Paper Does and Does Not Claim
This paper targets one closure item: converting the weak-angle mapping from a postulate into a derived ratio within the GD-313 projector-EFT setting.
1.1. Claim Status
We separate four layers: (i) proved selection theorem (published separately as a Letter package), (ii) explicit embedding (this paper), (iii) induced-coupling ratio computation (this paper), (iv) program targets not claimed here (absolute normalization of couplings and full RG running beyond the declared matching point).
1.2. What Is Not Claimed
We do not claim a full Standard Model derivation, nor do we claim an absolute value for g or without additional regulator-dependent inputs. We compute the ratio-level quantity that determines once the universal prefactor cancels in the ratio.
2. Background and Context
2.1. The GD-313 Vacuum Instance
GD-313 is the flagship instance of Geometric Design, in which two scheme-fixed anchors select , hence . This paper assumes that selection result and focuses on the electroweak embedding and induced ratio.
2.2. Electroweak Mixing Angle Definition
In standard conventions,
Our goal is to compute the ratio
from induced kinetic terms generated by integrating out the heavy coset sector.
3. Projector EFT Setup and the Coset Sector
3.1. Projector Field
Let
be a rank-
k Hermitian projector on
with
. Locally, write
with
and
. Define the current
and block-decompose it with respect to
:
where
is the off-diagonal bifundamental coset sector of complex dimension
.
3.2. One-loop Induced Kinetic Terms
In background-field gauge, integrating out heavy coset fluctuations yields a one-loop determinant whose derivative expansion contains gauge kinetic terms. For Laplace-type operators, this structure is standard (heat-kernel expansion); the ratio of the induced coefficients for different gauge factors is controlled by representation indices and multiplicities.
4. CL1: Explicit Electroweak Embedding
We specify an explicit embedding of and compatible with the split.
4.1. Embedding
We embed as the standard action inside a chosen 2-plane of the 13-dimensional complement, so that the coset sector decomposes into identical doublets. This yields an index proportional to k.
4.2. Hypercharge Generator
We define a diagonal
commuting with the chosen
and constant on the block decomposition
so that the off-diagonal coset modes acquire well-defined charges. The constants are fixed by tracelessness and a normalization convention stated in
Appendix A.
4.3. Hypercharge Completion Principle (Residual Fixing)
At the Lie-algebra level, the commutant of the chosen
embedding inside
contains a two-dimensional space of diagonal generators that are block-constant on
and commute with
. Imposing tracelessness and the fixed trace-normalization convention reduces this to a one-parameter family of admissible
Y. GD-313 fixes the residual freedom by a
hypercharge completion condition: the induced-coupling ratio computed from the heavy coset sector is required to match the geometric sector ratio selected in the integer scan, i.e.
Under the index-controlled one-loop formula (
Section 5), this is equivalent (in our generator conventions) to the discrete abelian-index condition
. The resulting closed-form generator
Y is recorded in
Appendix A and audited in the proof-bank notes CL1–CL2.
Status. This completion condition is part of the model definition (a hypothesis layer), not a theorem of QFT alone; once fixed, it is held constant across all validation and robustness analyses.
5. CL2: Induced Coupling Ratio and
5.1. Index Computation Overview
Let
B denote the heavy coset sector degrees of freedom integrated out. The induced gauge kinetic coefficients take the schematic form
with
proportional to the corresponding representation indices
. Under the universal-prefactor cancellation assumption, the ratio
equals
.
Lemma (index-controlled ratio; scope of the prefactor cancellation).
For a heavy sector consisting of fields with a
common Laplace-type kinetic operator in background-field gauge, the leading gauge-kinetic term in the one-loop effective action is controlled by the heat-kernel coefficient multiplying
. In this setting one has
where
is the quadratic index of the heavy representation under the
ith gauge factor and
is a universal prefactor independent of
i. Therefore the ratio
depends only on indices.
1 Deviations can occur if the heavy spectrum is not degenerate (different masses), if additional heavy fields contribute with different group weights, or if the regulator treats the two gauge sectors asymmetrically; such effects are explicitly out of scope for the present ratio-level closure.
5.2. Result
For the GD-313 coset sector under the CL1 embedding, the indices evaluate to
hence
The detailed computation is given in
Appendix B.
5.3. Matching Convention and Comparison
This paper reports the ratio-level derivation at the declared matching convention. If an RG-running step is required to compare to the PDG value at , it must be stated explicitly with the chosen scheme and thresholds. We provide a matching note and scripts in the companion reproducibility package.
6. Reproducibility and Audit Map
This submission includes: (i) the embedding note (
Appendix A), (ii) the index computation (
Appendix B), (iii) a reproducibility script that recomputes the index ratio from the embedding parameters.
Appendix A. CL1 Embedding Generators and Normalization
This appendix records the explicit generator-level embedding used for and the diagonal Y generator, together with the fixed normalization convention. For a compact presentation, we use matrix-unit notation . The explicit lists are also provided as a companion LaTeX proof note in the included supplementary folder.
Appendix B. CL2 Index Computation
We compute the index and the charge-squared index for the heavy coset sector under the CL1 embedding. The key point is that the heavy sector decomposes into identical doublets, producing . The hypercharge assignment yields under the stated normalization. We then evaluate .
References
- S. L. Glashow, Partial symmetries of weak interactions, Nucl. Phys. 22, 579–588 (1961). [CrossRef]
- S. Weinberg, A model of leptons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19, 1264–1266 (1967).
- A. Salam, Weak and electromagnetic interactions, in Elementary Particle Theory, ed. N. Svartholm (Almqvist & Wiksell, 1968).
- Particle Data Group, Review of Particle Physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2024, 083C01 (2024).
- G. ’t Hooft, Renormalization of massless Yang–Mills fields, Nucl. Phys. B 33, 173–199 (1971).
- G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Regularization and renormalization of gauge fields, Nucl. Phys. B 44, 189–213 (1972).
- L. F. Abbott, Introduction to the background field method, Acta Phys. Polon. B 13, 33 (1982).
- B. S. DeWitt, Quantum theory of gravity. II. The manifestly covariant theory, Phys. Rev. 162, 1195–1239 (1967). [CrossRef]
- D. V. Vassilevich, Heat kernel expansion: user’s manual, Phys. Rep. 388, 279–360 (2003). [CrossRef]
- P. B. Gilkey, Invariance Theory, the Heat Equation, and the Atiyah–Singer Index Theorem, 2nd ed., CRC Press (1995).
- T. Eguchi, P. B. Gilkey, and A. J. Hanson, Gravitation, gauge theories and differential geometry, Phys. Rep. 66, 213–393 (1980). [CrossRef]
- M. Nakahara, Geometry, Topology and Physics (2nd ed.), Taylor & Francis (2003).
- S. Helgason, Differential Geometry, Lie Groups, and Symmetric Spaces, Academic Press (1978).
- H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, Unity of all elementary-particle forces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 438–441 (1974). [CrossRef]
- A. D. Sakharov, Vacuum quantum fluctuations in curved space and the theory of gravitation, Sov. Phys. Dokl. 12, 1040 (1968).
- S. L. Adler, Einstein gravity as a symmetry-breaking effect in quantum field theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 729–766 (1982). [CrossRef]
- M. Visser, Sakharov’s induced gravity: a modern perspective, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 17, 977–991 (2002). [CrossRef]
- A. Postnikov, Total positivity, Grassmannians, and networks, arXiv:math/0609764.
- N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Trnka, The amplituhedron, JHEP 1410, 030 (2014). [CrossRef]
- M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, Addison-Wesley (1995).
- S. Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields, Vol. II, Cambridge University Press (1996).
- W. J. Marciano and J. L. Rosner, Atomic parity violation as a probe of new physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2963–2966 (1990). [CrossRef]
- P. J. Mohr, D. B. Newell, and B. N. Taylor, CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2014, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035009 (2016). [CrossRef]
- E. Tiesinga, P. J. Mohr, D. B. Newell, and B. N. Taylor, CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025010 (2021). [CrossRef]
| 1 |
See, e.g., the heat-kernel review of Vassilevich [ 9] and background-field derivations in Refs. [ 6, 7]. |
|
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).