MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518944801 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2016)129

On volumes of subregions in holography and complexity

2016· article· en· W2518944801 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIsrael Science FoundationGovernment of Canada
KeywordsQuantum entanglementDisjoint setsHolographyEntropy (arrow of time)Boundary (topology)Discontinuity (linguistics)Surface (topology)Volume (thermodynamics)Jump

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The volume of the region inside the bulk Ryu-Takayanagi surface is a codimension-one object, and a natural generalization of holographic complexity to the case of subregions in the boundary QFT. We focus on time-independent geometries, and study the properties of this volume in various circumstances. We derive a formula for computing the volume for a strip entangling surface and a general asymptotically AdS bulk geometry. For an AdS black hole geometry, the volume exhibits non-monotonic behaviour as a function of the size of the entangling region (unlike the behaviour of the entanglement entropy in this setup, which is monotonic). For setups in which the holographic entanglement entropy exhibits transitions in the bulk, such as global AdS black hole, geometries dual to confining theories and disjoint entangling surfaces, the corresponding volume exhibits a discontinuous finite jump at the transition point (and so do the volumes of the corresponding entanglement wedges). We compute this volume discontinuity in several examples. Lastly, we compute the codim-zero volume and the bulk action of the entanglement wedge for the case of a sphere entangling surface and pure AdS geometry.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations123
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207