MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409246750 · doi:10.1090/jams/929

Tsirelson’s problem and an embedding theorem for groups arising from non-local games

2019· article· en· W2409246750 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Mathematical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Operator Algebra Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEmbeddingEmbedding problemConstruct (python library)Operator (biology)State (computer science)Group (periodic table)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tsirelson’s problem asks whether the commuting operator model for two-party quantum correlations is equivalent to the tensor-product model. We give a negative answer to this question by showing that there are non-local games which have perfect commuting-operator strategies, but do not have perfect tensor-product strategies. The weak Tsirelson problem, which is known to be equivalent to the Connes embedding problem, remains open. The examples we construct are instances of (binary) linear system games. For such games, previous results state that the existence of perfect strategies is controlled by the solution group of the linear system. Our main result is that every finitely-presented group embeds in some solution group. As an additional consequence, we show that the problem of determining whether a linear system game has a perfect commuting-operator strategy is undecidable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.012
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations60
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Mathematical SocietySame topicAdvanced Operator Algebra ResearchFrench-language works237,207