Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.036 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
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".