MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967752517 · doi:10.1038/srep01824

No-go theorem for ground state cooling given initial system-thermal bath factorization

2013· article· en· W1967752517 on OpenAlexafffund
Lian-Ao Wu, Dvira Segal, Paul Brumer

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersU.S. Air ForceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEusko Jaurlaritza
KeywordsGround stateUnitary stateThermalState (computer science)Work (physics)Product (mathematics)Operator (biology)QuantumComputer scienceConstraint (computer-aided design)Thermal stateObject (grammar)Statistical physicsPhysicsMathematicsMechanical engineeringQuantum mechanicsThermodynamicsAlgorithmEngineeringChemistryArtificial intelligenceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ground-state cooling and pure state preparation of a small object that is embedded in a thermal environment is an important challenge and a highly desirable quantum technology. This paper proves, with two different methods, that a fundamental constraint on the cooling dynamic implies that it is impossible to cool, via a unitary system-bath quantum evolution, a system that is embedded in a thermal environment down to its ground state, if the initial state is a factorized product of system and bath states. The latter is a crucial but artificial assumption included in numerous tools that treat system-bath dynamics, such as master equation approaches and Kraus operator based methods. Adopting these approaches to address ground state and even approximate ground state cooling dynamics should therefore be done with caution, considering the fundamental theorem exposed in this work.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207