MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041157296 · doi:10.1063/1.3431500

A Consistent Histories Formulation of Wheeler-DeWitt Quantum Cosmology

2010· article· en· W2041157296 on OpenAlexafffund
David Craig, Parampreet Singh, Andrei Khrennikov

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théorique
KeywordsQuantum cosmologyQuantum decoherencePhysicsQuantumQuantization (signal processing)Canonical quantizationTheoretical physicsQuantum dissipationUniverseScalar fieldQuantum mechanicsClassical mechanicsQuantum gravityMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We summarize a fully worked-out consistent histories formulation of a quantum cosmological model, and illustrate with an example calculation of the probability that the quantum universe becomes singular. Specifically, we take a complete Wheeler-DeWitt canonical quantization of a flat Friedmann-Robertson- Walker cosmological model sourced with a free massless scalar field, and construct the decoherence functional which determines which quantum histories may be consistently assigned probabilities. As an example, we exhibit the probability that the quantum universe is singular in the sense that it assumes zero volume. The classical solutions of this model are all singular; we show that the quantum solutions are as well.We comment on the crucial role played by quantum decoherence in arriving at this conclusion. © 2010 American Institute of Physics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207