Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well known that the canonical commutation relation [x, p] = i can be realized only on an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space. While any finite set of experimental data can also be explained in terms of a finite-dimensional Hilbert space by approximating the commutation relation, Occam's razor prefers the infinite-dimensional model in which [x, p] = i holds on the nose. This reasoning one will necessarily have to make in any approach which tries to detect the infinite-dimensionality. One drawback of using the canonical commutation relation for this purpose is that it has unclear operational meaning. Here, we identify an operationally well-defined context from which an analogous conclusion can be drawn: if two unitary transformations U, V on a quantum system satisfy the relation V−1U2V = U3, then finite-dimensionality entails the relation UV−1UV = V−1UVU; this implication strongly fails in some infinite-dimensional realizations. This is a result from combinatorial group theory for which we give a new proof. This proof adapts to the consideration of cases where the assumed relation V−1U2V = U3 holds only up to ε and then yields a lower bound on the dimension.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".