Holography and quantum states in elliptic de Sitter space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We outline a program for interpreting the higher-spin dS/CFT model in terms of physics in the causal patch of a dS observer. The proposal is formulated in “elliptic” de Sitter space $$ d{S}_4/{\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}}_2 $$ , obtained by identifying antipodal points in dS 4. We discuss recent evidence that the higher-spin model is especially well-suited for this, since the antipodal symmetry of bulk solutions has a simple encoding on the boundary. For context, we test some other (free and interacting) theories for the same property. Next, we analyze the notion of quantum field states in the non-time-orientable $$ d{S}_4/{\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}}_2 $$ . We compare the physics seen by different observers, with the outcome depending on whether they share an arrow of time. Finally, we implement the marriage between higher-spin holography and observers in $$ d{S}_4/{\mathrm{\mathbb{Z}}}_2 $$ , in the limit of free bulk fields. We succeed in deriving an observer’s operator algebra and Hamiltonian from the CFT, but not her S-matrix. We speculate on the extension of this to interacting higher-spin theory.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".