MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083678568 · doi:10.1142/s0217751x20501481

The Landau problem and nonclassicality

2020· article· en· W3083678568 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics A · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian Physics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Quantum Research Center
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariant transformationSymplectic geometryPhase spaceHilbert spaceGauge theoryManifold (fluid mechanics)Space (punctuation)Symmetry (geometry)Representation (politics)Wave function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exploring the concept of the extended Galilei group [Formula: see text]. Representations for field theories in a symplectic manifold have been derived in association with the method of the Wigner function. The representation is written in the light-cone of a de Sitter space–time in five dimensions. A Hilbert space is constructed, endowed with a symplectic structure, which is used as a representation space for the Lie algebra of [Formula: see text]. This representation gives rise to the spin-0 Schrödinger (Klein–Gordon-like) equation for the wave functions in phase space, such that the dependent variables have the content of position and linear momentum. This is a particular example of a conformal theory, such that the wave functions are associated with the Wigner function through the Moyal product. We construct the Pauli–Schrödinger (Dirac-like) equation in phase space in its explicitly covariant form. In addition, we analyze the gauge symmetry for spin-1/2 particles in phase space and show how implement the minimal coupling in this case. We applied to the problem of an electron in an external field, and we recovered the nonrelativistic Landau levels. Finally, we study the parameter of negativity associated with the nonclassicality of the system.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics ASame topicQuantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian PhysicsFrench-language works237,207