MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082060938 · doi:10.3390/e22101110

Comment on Tsallis, C. Black Hole Entropy: A Closer Look. Entropy 2020, 22, 17

2020· article· en· W3082060938 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStatistical Mechanics and Entropy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTsallis entropyStatistical physicsEntropy in thermodynamics and information theoryEntropy (arrow of time)MathematicsPhysicsQuantum relative entropyGeneralized relative entropyJoint quantum entropyMaximum entropy thermodynamicsPrinciple of maximum entropyThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsStatisticsQuantumQuantum discordQuantum entanglement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a recent paper (Entropy 2020, 22(1), 17), Tsallis states that entropy-as in Shannon or Kullback-Leiber's definitions-is inadequate to interpret black hole entropy and suggests that a new non-additive functional should take the role of entropy. Here we counterargue by explaining the important distinction between the properties of extensivity and additivity; the latter is fundamental for entropy, while the former is a property of particular thermodynamical systems that is not expected for black holes. We also point out other debatable statements in his analysis of black hole entropy.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
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