MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982895402 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0376

Quasi-equilibrium relaxation of two identical quantum oscillators with arbitrary coupling strength

2014· article· en· W1982895402 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Illarion Dorofeyev

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsFluctuation-dissipation theoremCoupling (piping)Thermal equilibriumLimit (mathematics)Statistical physicsDissipationCentral limit theoremQuantumCoupling strengthDensity matrixPath integral formulationRelaxation (psychology)CovarianceExpression (computer science)Quantum mechanicsMathematical analysisStatisticsCondensed matter physicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deals with the problem of open systems out of equilibrium. An analytical expression for a time-dependent density matrix of two arbitrarily coupled identical quantum oscillators interacting with separate reservoirs is derived using path integral methods. The temporal behavior of spatial variances and of covariance from given initial values up to stationary values is investigated. It is shown that at comparatively low coupling strengths, the asymptotic variances in the long-time limit achieve steady states independently of initial values. Stationary variances differ from the case of total equilibrium due to their coupling with separate thermal reservoirs of different temperatures. The larger the difference in temperatures of thermal baths, the larger is the difference of the stationary values of variances of coupled oscillators compared with values given by the fluctuation dissipation theorem. At strong couplings the variances have divergent character in the framework of the accepted model. Otherwise, in the weak coupling limit the asymptotic stationary variances are always in accordance with the fluctuation dissipation theorem with some accuracy.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207