MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020994993 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab8e66

Aspects of the first law of complexity

2020· article· en· W3020994993 on OpenAlexafffund
Alice Bernamonti, Federico Galli, Juan Hernandez, Robert C. Myers, Shan-Ming Ruan, Joan Simón

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionGovernment of CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaSimons Foundation
KeywordsScalar (mathematics)GaussianCircuit complexityComputational complexity theoryVariation (astronomy)Statistical physicsQuantumHolographyField (mathematics)Coherent statesPhysicsTheoretical physicsMathematicsAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsElectronic circuitPure mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the first law of complexity proposed in Bernamonti et al (2019 Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 081601), i.e., the variation of complexity when the target state is perturbed, in more detail. Based on Nielsen’s geometric approach to quantum circuit complexity, we find the variation only depends on the end of the optimal circuit. We apply the first law to gain new insights into the quantum circuits and complexity models underlying holographic complexity. In particular, we examine the variation of the holographic complexity for both the complexity = action and complexity = volume conjectures in perturbing the AdS vacuum with coherent state excitations of a free scalar field. We also examine the variations of circuit complexity produced by the same excitations for the free scalar field theory in a fixed AdS background. In this case, our work extends the existing treatment of Gaussian coherent states to properly include the time dependence of the complexity variation. We comment on the similarities and differences of the holographic and QFT results.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207