MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038003343 · doi:10.1007/jhep12(2020)028

Holo-ween

2020· article· en· W3038003343 on OpenAlexaff
Petar Simidzija, Mark Van Raamsdonk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSpacetimeMathematical physicsQuantum gravityGravitationHamiltonian (control theory)Quantum entanglementPath integral formulationQuantum mechanicsQuantumTheoretical physicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We argue that given holographic CFT1 in some state with a dual spacetime geometry M, and given some other holographic CFT2, we can find states of CFT2 whose dual geometries closely approximate arbitrarily large causal patches of M, provided that CFT1 and CFT2 can be non-trivially coupled at an interface. Our CFT2 states are “dressed up as” states of CFT1: they are obtained from the original CFT1 state by a regularized quench operator defined using a Euclidean path-integral with an interface between CFT2 and CFT1. Our results are consistent with the idea that the precise microscopic degrees of freedom and Hamiltonian of a holographic CFT are only important in fixing the asymptotic behavior of a dual spacetime, while the interior spacetime of a region spacelike separated from a boundary time slice is determined by more universal properties (such as entanglement structure) of the quantum state at this time slice. Our picture requires that low-energy gravitational theories related to CFTs that can be non-trivially coupled at an interface are part of the same non-perturbative theory of quantum gravity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.010

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations55
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207