On the Noether charge and the gravity duals of quantum complexity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The physical relevance of the thermodynamic volumes of AdS black holes to the gravity duals of quantum complexity was recently argued by Couch et al. In this paper, by generalizing the Wald-Iyer formalism, we derive a geometric expression for the thermodynamic volume and relate its product with the thermodynamic pressure to the non-derivative part of the gravitational action evaluated on the Wheeler-DeWitt patch. We propose that this action provides an alternative gravity dual of the quantum complexity of the boundary theory. We refer this to “complexity=action 2.0” (CA-2) duality. It is significantly different from the original “complexity=action” (CA) duality as well as the “complexity=volume 2.0” (CV-2) duality proposed by Couch et al. The latter postulates that the complexity is dual to the spacetime volume of the Wheeler-DeWitt patch. To distinguish our new conjecture from the various dualities in literature, we study a number of black holes in Einstein-Maxwell-Dilation theories. We find that for all these black holes, the CA duality generally does not respect the Lloyd bound whereas the CV-2 duality always does. For the CA-2 duality, although in many cases it is consistent with the Lloyd bound, we also find a counter example for which it violates the bound as well.
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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".