MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149898814 · doi:10.1103/physreva.104.013723

Dimensional reduction of cavities with axial symmetry: A complete analysis of when an optical fiber is approximately one dimensional

2021· article· en· W3149898814 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Grimmer, Richard Lopp, Eduardo Martín-Martínez

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Electrodynamics and Casimir Effect
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAxial symmetryPhysicsQuantumOptical fiberQuantum mechanicsOpticsRegular polygonClassical mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intuition dictates that a very long, very thin cavity (e.g., a fiber optic cable) could perhaps be modeled as an approximately one-dimensional system. In this paper we rigorously explore the validity of such intuition from the perspective of a localized probe coupling to a quantum field inside a cavity (e.g., an atom or an Unruh-DeWitt particle detector in a fiber optic cable). To do so, we introduce the notion of subfield decomposition in which a ($D+1$)-dimensional quantum field in an axially symmetric cavity can be reduced to an infinite collection of uncoupled, massive ($1+1$)-dimensional fields. We show that the ability to approximate a higher-dimensional scenario by a ($1+1$)-dimensional model is equivalent to making a certain change of the probe's shape in the higher-dimensional space. The approximation is justified whenever this change of shape is ``small enough.'' In this light, we identify the dynamically relevant norm by which the magnitude of these changes in probe shape ought to be judged. Finally, we explore this approximation in particular setups corresponding to quantum optics and superconducting circuits.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.317
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicQuantum Electrodynamics and Casimir EffectFrench-language works237,207