MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023033110 · doi:10.1119/1.1456069

The quantum pendulum: Small and large

2002· article· en· W2023033110 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

VenueAmerican Journal of Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPendulumClassical mechanicsQuantumDouble pendulumMeasure (data warehouse)Position (finance)Statistical physicsChaoticGravitationInverted pendulumQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quantum pendulum finds application in surprising contexts. We use commercially available software to numerically solve the Schrödinger equation for a microscopic pendulum subject to molecular (electromagnetic) restoring forces, and a macroscopic pendulum subject to a gravitational restoring force. The dynamics of the microscopic quantum pendulum are closely related to molecular motions known as hindered rotations. We use standard probabilistic methods to predict whether this motion is weakly or strongly hindered at ambient temperature and test the prediction against experimental data for C2H6 and K2PtCl6. For the macroscopic gravitational pendulum, we examine the uncertainty in position and find, not surprisingly, that it is too small to measure physically, but is nevertheless relatively large compared to present-day limits in computation. The latter juxtaposition of computational precision with quantum uncertainty has consequences for the study of chaotic dynamics.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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