Cosmological quantum entanglement: a possible testbed for the existence of Kalb–Ramond field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the present paper, we explore the possible effects of a second rank antisymmetric tensor field, known as Kalb–Ramond (KR) field, on cosmological particle production as well as on quantum entanglement for a massive scalar field propagating in a four dimensional FRW spacetime evolves through a symmetric bounce. For this purpose, the scalar field is considered to be coupled with the KR field and also with the Ricci scalar via the term ∼ ξR Φ 2 (with ξ be the coupling). The presence of KR field spoils the conformal symmetry of a massless scalar field even for ξ = 1/6 in four dimensional context, which has interesting consequences on particle production and consequently on quantum entanglement as we will discuss. In particular, the presence of KR field in an FRW bouncing Universe allows a greater particle production and consequently the upper bound of the entanglement entropy becomes larger in comparison to the case when the KR field is absent. This may provide an interesting testbed for the existence of Kalb–Ramond field in our Universe.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".