Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
An earlier paper of this series gave a closed mean-field ratio Δ₀/T_c = r(a) = R(a)1/a, R(a) = 2ᵃ⁺¹ η(a) Γ(1 + a/2)/Γ(1 − a/2), at the pairing threshold of a superconductor whose density of states grows like |ξ|^a, 0 < a < 2. We ask what survives beyond mean field and answer in three parts. (A) The two gap equations of that paper are, line by line, the large-N saddle-point equations of the Gross–Neveu model in D = a + 2 space-time dimensions; the threshold coupling a is the critical coupling, and the threshold ratio is the ratio M/T_c of the renormalised theory, for every coupling of the ordered phase. We prove that r(a) coincides with the closed formula of Inagaki, Kouno and Muta (1995) for D-dimensional four-fermion theories; the cases D = 2 and D = 3 give π e−γ and 2 ln 2. (B) Near D = 4 the order parameter fluctuates. In the Gross–Neveu–Yukawa model at its infrared fixed point in D = 4 − ε we obtain, at leading order in ε, the closed form (M/T_c)² = ε ρ_n(N) for the chiral Ising, XY and Heisenberg classes (n = 1, 2, 3) with N four-component Dirac fermions. The bosonic thermal tadpole brings ζ(2), the fermionic one η(2) = ζ(2)/2. For N → ∞, ρ_n(N) → 4η(2) = π²/3, which is exactly the mean-field edge r(a)² ∼ 4η(2)(2 − a): the two limits commute. The first correction is +(n + 2)π²/N, and ρ_n(N) > π²/3 for all N: fluctuations raise the gap-to-T_c ratio. (C) A descriptive comparison with lattice Monte Carlo and functional-renormalisation data for the chiral Ising class in D = 3 shows the same sign of the 1/N_f correction. All statements are classical; every numbered claim is checked by companion code. Each result carries a status label (proved, leading order, descriptive). The paper has boxes in plain words and for readers from physics and from mathematics, three figures and a glossary. The companion archive contains the check program (items A1–A7, B1–B8, E1–E4; 78 checks at 30 and 50 digits, all passed), the two reference logs and the figure script.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas Krause (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: