MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3057604112 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/abb040

The dynamics of entropies at the onset of interactions

2020· article· en· W3057604112 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Kendall, Achim Kempf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragilityStatistical physicsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsMathematicsOperator (biology)Density matrixEntropy (arrow of time)Von Neumann entropyQuantumHamiltonian (control theory)Quantum mechanicsPhysicsQuantum entanglementMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract At the onset of an interaction between two initially independent systems, each system tends to experience an increase in its n -Rényi entropies, such as its von Neumann entropy ( n = 1) and its mixedness ( n = 2). We here ask which properties of a system determine how quickly its Rényi entropies increase and, therefore, how sensitive the system is to becoming entangled. We find that the rate at which the n -Rényi entropy increases in an interaction is determined by a quantity which we term the n -fragility of the system. The 2-fragility is closely related to the notion of 2-norm coherence, in that it too quantifies the extent to which a density matrix is ‘off-diagonal’ with respect to the eigenbasis of a reference operator. Nevertheless, the 2-fragility is not a coherence monotone in the resource theoretic sense since it depends also on the eigenvalues of the reference operator. It is this additional sensitivity to the eigenvalues of the reference operator, here the interaction Hamiltonian, which enables the 2-fragility to quantify the rate of entropy production in interactions. We give an example using the light–matter interaction and we anticipate applications to the study of the rates at which two systems exchange classical and quantum information when starting to interact.

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)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207