MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073521004 · doi:10.1142/s0218271814500266

IN–IN FORMALISM, PSEUDO-INSTANTONS AND RETHINKING QUANTUM COSMOLOGY

2014· article· en· W2073521004 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Kaya

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics D · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPath integral formulationQuantum cosmologyTheoretical physicsInstantonObservableCosmologyQuantum field theoryLoop quantum cosmologyClassical mechanicsRotation formalisms in three dimensionsQuantum mechanicsFormalism (music)QuantumQuantum gravityMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike flat space quantum field theories that focus on scattering amplitudes, the main observables in quantum cosmology are correlation functions. The systematic way of calculating correlators is called in–in formalism, which requires only a single asymptotic region, i.e. past infinity. The rules in perturbation theory and the path integral measure are very different for in–in and in–out formalisms, and thus the results which are standard in one approach may not necessarily hold in the other one. We show that stationary phase approximation works completely different for a scalar in–in path integral. Hence, in a cosmological background there are solutions, pseudo-instantons, that allow tunneling between locally stable vacua even in infinite volume, which is counterintuitive from an in–out perspective. We argue that various familiar notions of in–out formalism must be re-examined in the in–in formalism, which might have important consequences for quantum cosmology.

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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics DSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207