Regularising data for practical randomness generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assuming that the no-signalling principle holds, non-local correlations contain intrinsic randomness. In particular, for a specific Bell experiment, one can derive relations between the amount of randomness produced, as quantified by the min-entropy of the output data, and its associated violation of a Bell inequality. In practice, due to finite sampling, certifying randomness requires the development of statistical tools to lower-bound the min-entropy of the data as a function of the estimated Bell violation. The quality of such bounds relies on the choice of certificate, i.e. the Bell inequality whose violation is estimated. In this work, we propose a method for choosing efficiently such a certificate and analyse, by means of extensive numerical simulations (with various choices of parameters), the extent to which it works. The method requires sacrificing a part of the output data in order to estimate the underlying correlations. Regularising this estimate then allows one to find a Bell inequality that is well suited for certifying practical randomness from these specific correlations. We then study the effects of various parameters on the obtained min-entropy bound and explain how to tune them in a favourable way. Lastly, we carry out several numerical simulations of a Bell experiment to show the efficiency of our method: we nearly always obtain higher min-entropy rates than when we use a pre-established Bell inequality, namely the Clauser–Horne–Shimony–Holt inequality.
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 | 0.010 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".