MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513601047 · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aa68ef

Thermodynamics and the structure of quantum theory

2017· article· en· W2513601047 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Journal of Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteWestern University
FundersCanada Research ChairsFoundational Questions Institute
KeywordsProbabilistic logicFormalism (music)QuantumLinear subspaceClass (philosophy)Hilbert spaceRegular polygonQuantum process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite its enormous empirical success, the formalism of quantum theory still raises fundamental questions: why is nature described in terms of complex Hilbert spaces, and what modifications of it could we reasonably expect to find in some regimes of physics? Here we address these questions by studying how compatibility with thermodynamics constrains the structure of quantum theory. We employ two postulates that any probabilistic theory with reasonable thermodynamic behaviour should arguably satisfy. In the framework of generalised probabilistic theories, we show that these postulates already imply important aspects of quantum theory, like self-duality and analogues of projective measurements, subspaces and eigenvalues. However, they may still admit a class of theories beyond quantum mechanics. Using a thought experiment by von Neumann, we show that these theories admit a consistent thermodynamic notion of entropy, and prove that the second law holds for projective measurements and mixing procedures. Furthermore, we study additional entropy-like quantities based on measurement probabilities and convex decomposition probabilities, and uncover a relation between one of these quantities and Sorkin’s notion of higher-order interference.

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)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations36
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Journal of PhysicsSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207