MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211018347 · doi:10.1103/physreve.92.036901

Comment on “Entanglement and chaos in the kicked top”

2015· letter· en· W2211018347 on OpenAlexaff
Vaibhav Madhok

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum chaos and dynamical systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum entanglementChaoticStatistical physicsCHAOS (operating system)State (computer science)PhysicsQuantum chaosConnection (principal bundle)Point (geometry)Signature (topology)Theoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsComputer scienceQuantumQuantum dynamicsAlgorithmGeometryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We comment on the investigation of the connection between chaos and dynamically generated entanglement in Lombardi and Matzkin [Phys. Rev. E 83, 016207 (2011)PRESCM1539-375510.1103/PhysRevE.83.016207]. Whereas, in the referred paper, the authors give an explicit example of a state initially localized in the regular region and still has entanglement properties similar to the states localized in the chaotic region, a few clarifications related to previous works are in order. First, it is crucial to point out that such a behavior can occur for states initially localized near the border between the chaotic region and the regular island, which seems to be the case in the example provided in the referred paper. We comment on the time evolution of such states and the extent to which these can be regarded as having "regular dynamics." Second, the degree to which entanglement is correlated with the chaos in the system is better understood when we analyze the same initial state and increase the chaoticity in the system gradually. We also discuss in what capacity entanglement can be regarded as a signature of chaos in such studies.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicQuantum chaos and dynamical systemsFrench-language works237,207