Entwinement in discretely gauged theories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We develop the notion of “entwinement” to characterize the amount of quantum entanglement between internal, discretely gauged degrees of freedom in a quantum field theory. This concept originated in the program of reconstructing spacetime from entanglement in holographic duality. We define entwinement formally in terms of a novel replica method which uses twist operators charged in a representation of the discrete gauge group. In terms of these twist operators we define a non-local, gauge-invariant object whose expectation value computes entwinement in a standard replica limit. We apply our method to the computation of entwinement in symmetric orbifold conformal field theories in 1+1 dimensions, which have an S N gauging. Such a theory appears in the weak coupling limit of the D1-D5 string theory which is dual to AdS3 at strong coupling. In this context, we show how certain kinds of entwinement measure the lengths, in units of the AdS scale, of non-minimal geodesics present in certain excited states of the system which are gravitationally described as conical defects and the M = 0 BTZ black hole. The possible types of entwinement that can be computed define a very large new class of quantities characterizing the fine structure of quantum wavefunctions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".