MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936347635 · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ab377f

Towards bulk metric reconstruction from extremal area variations

2019· article· en· W2936347635 on OpenAlexafffund
Ning Bao, ChunJun Cao, Sebastian Fischetti, Cynthia Keeler

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersOffice of ScienceNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOkinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate UniversityU.S. Department of DefenseU.S. Department of EnergyAdvanced Scientific Computing ResearchNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonHigh Energy PhysicsKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraSimons Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsMetric (unit)Boundary (topology)Quantum entanglementCovariant transformationTopology (electrical circuits)Dimension (graph theory)UniquenessTheoretical physicsSpacetimePure mathematicsMathematical physicsMathematical analysisQuantum mechanicsQuantumMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Ryu–Takayanagi and Hubeny–Rangamani–Takayanagi formulae suggest that bulk geometry emerges from the entanglement structure of the boundary theory. Using these formulae, we build on a result of Alexakis, Balehowsky, and Nachman to show that in four bulk dimensions, the entanglement entropies of boundary regions of disk topology uniquely fix the bulk metric in any region foliated by the corresponding HRT surfaces. More generally, for a bulk of any dimension , knowledge of the (variations of the) areas of two-dimensional boundary-anchored extremal surfaces of disk topology uniquely fixes the bulk metric wherever these surfaces reach. This result is covariant and not reliant on any symmetry assumptions; its applicability thus includes regions of strong dynamical gravity such as the early-time interior of black holes formed from collapse. While we only show uniqueness of the metric, the approach we present provides a clear path towards an explicit spacetime metric reconstruction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations57
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207