MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106403730 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2023356118

Maximizing power and velocity of an information engine

2021· article· en· W3106403730 on OpenAlexafffund
Tushar K. Saha, Joseph N. E. Lucero, Jannik Ehrich, David A. Sivak, John Bechhoefer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsGovernment of CanadaFoundational Questions Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithmMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information-driven engines that rectify thermal fluctuations are a modern realization of the Maxwell-demon thought experiment. We introduce a simple design based on a heavy colloidal particle, held by an optical trap and immersed in water. Using a carefully designed feedback loop, our experimental realization of an "information ratchet" takes advantage of favorable "up" fluctuations to lift a weight against gravity, storing potential energy without doing external work. By optimizing the ratchet design for performance via a simple theory, we find that the rate of work storage and velocity of directed motion are limited only by the physical parameters of the engine: the size of the particle, stiffness of the ratchet spring, friction produced by the motion, and temperature of the surrounding medium. Notably, because performance saturates with increasing frequency of observations, the measurement process is not a limiting factor. The extracted power and velocity are at least an order of magnitude higher than in previously reported engines.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations63
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207