MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021537516 · doi:10.1063/1.2165187

Ordering of limits in the Jarzynski equality

2006· article· en· W2021537516 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Steve Pressé, R. Silbey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCumulantStatistical physicsNon-equilibrium thermodynamicsWork (physics)ScalingRelation (database)MathematicsPhase transitionPhase spaceEnergy (signal processing)PhysicsQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the sampling problems encountered in computing free-energy differences using Jarzynski's nonequilibrium work relation [Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 2690 (1997)]. This relation expresses the free-energy change of a system, on which finite-time work is done, as an average over all possible trajectories of the system. This average can then be expressed as a cumulant expansion of the work. We study the scaling of these cumulants with an appropriately defined measure of phase-space accessibility epsilon and particle number N for two simple changes in state. We find that the cumulant expansion is slowly convergent for predominantly entropic processes, those where epsilon is considerably altered during the course of the process. An accurate determination of the free-energy change requires some knowledge of the behavior of the tails of the work distribution associated with the process. Jarzynski's irreversible work relation is only valid with the correct ordering of the infinite limits of N and epsilon, clarifying the regime of its applicability.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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