MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110175348 · doi:10.1142/s0129055x05002376

QUANTIZATION METHODS: A GUIDE FOR PHYSICISTS AND ANALYSTS

2005· review· en· W2110175348 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

VenueReviews in Mathematical Physics · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topics in Algebra
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeometric quantizationQuantization (signal processing)Canonical quantizationSecond quantizationFirst quantizationTheoretical physicsToeplitz matrixComputer scienceMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldQuantumPhysicsPure mathematicsQuantum gravityQuantum mechanicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This survey is an overview of some of the better known quantization techniques (for systems with finite numbers of degrees-of-freedom) including in particular canonical quantization and the related Dirac scheme, introduced in the early days of quantum mechanics, Segal and Borel quantizations, geometric quantization, various ramifications of deformation quantization, Berezin and Berezin–Toeplitz quantizations, prime quantization and coherent state quantization. We have attempted to give an account sufficiently in depth to convey the general picture, as well as to indicate the mutual relationships between various methods, their relative successes and shortcomings, mentioning also open problems in the area. Finally, even for approaches for which lack of space or expertise prevented us from treating them to the extent they would deserve, we have tried to provide ample references to the existing literature on the subject. In all cases, we have made an effort to keep the discussion accessible both to physicists and to mathematicians, including non-specialists in the field.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.270 · 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