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 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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