MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963689845 · doi:10.1142/s0218271805007802

FROM QUBITS TO BLACK HOLES: ENTROPY, ENTANGLEMENT AND ALL THAT

2005· article· en· W1963689845 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics D · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsQuantum entanglementHawking radiationBlack hole complementarityBlack hole thermodynamicsBlack hole (networking)Quantum mechanicsWhite holeEntropy (arrow of time)Micro black holeTheoretical physicsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Entropy plays a crucial role in the characterization of information and entanglement, but it is not a scalar quantity and for many systems it is different for different relativistic observers. We discuss two examples: entropy of a single qubit and renormalized entropy as given by a uniformly accelerated observer. Loop quantum gravity predicts the Bekenstein–Hawking term for black hole entropy and the logarithmic correction to it. The latter originates in the entanglement between the pieces of spin networks that describe black hole horizon. Entanglement between gravity and matter may restore the unitarity in the black hole evaporation process. If the collapsing matter is assumed to be initially in a pure state, then entropy of the Hawking radiation is exactly the created entanglement between matter and gravity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it