MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992996794 · doi:10.1063/1.3595693

Generating random density matrices

2011· article· en· W1992996794 on OpenAlexaff
Karol Życzkowski, K. A. Penson, Ion Nechita, Benoı̂t Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsQuantum entanglementMathematicsRandom matrixStatistical physicsUnitary stateQuantum stateQuantumQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study various methods to generate ensembles of random density matrices of a fixed size N, obtained by partial trace of pure states on composite systems. Structured ensembles of random pure states, invariant with respect to local unitary transformations are introduced. To analyze statistical properties of quantum entanglement in bi-partite systems we analyze the distribution of Schmidt coefficients of random pure states. Such a distribution is derived in the case of a superposition of k random maximally entangled states. For another ensemble, obtained by performing selective measurements in a maximally entangled basis on a multi-partite system, we show that this distribution is given by the Fuss-Catalan law and find the average entanglement entropy. A more general class of structured ensembles proposed, containing also the case of Bures, forms an extension of the standard ensemble of structureless random pure states, described asymptotically, as N → ∞, by the Marchenko-Pastur distribution.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations187
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207