Quantum Cuntz-Krieger algebras
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by the theory of Cuntz-Krieger algebras we define and study C ∗ C^\ast -algebras associated to directed quantum graphs. For classical graphs the C ∗ C^\ast -algebras obtained this way can be viewed as free analogues of Cuntz-Krieger algebras, and need not be nuclear. We study two particular classes of quantum graphs in detail, namely the trivial and the complete quantum graphs. For the trivial quantum graph on a single matrix block, we show that the associated quantum Cuntz-Krieger algebra is neither unital, nuclear nor simple, and does not depend on the size of the matrix block up to K K KK -equivalence. In the case of the complete quantum graphs we use quantum symmetries to show that, in certain cases, the corresponding quantum Cuntz-Krieger algebras are isomorphic to Cuntz algebras. These isomorphisms, which seem far from obvious from the definitions, imply in particular that these C ∗ C^\ast -algebras are all pairwise non-isomorphic for complete quantum graphs of different dimensions, even on the level of K K KK -theory. We explain how the notion of unitary error basis from quantum information theory can help to elucidate the situation. We also discuss quantum symmetries of quantum Cuntz-Krieger algebras in general.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".