Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recently, a novel formula for computing entropy in theories coupled to semi-classical gravity has been devised. Using this so-called island formula the entropy of semi-classical black holes follows a Page curve. Here, we study the relation between this novel entropy and semi-classical entropy in the context of doubly-holographic models. Double holography allows for two different d -dimensional descriptions of a black hole coupled to a non-gravitational bath, both of which allow a holographic computation of von Neumann entropy in bath subregions. We argue that the correct homology constraint for Ryu–Takayanagi surfaces depends on which of those d -dimensional perspectives is taken. As a consequence the von Neumann entropies of a fixed subregion in both descriptions can disagree. We discuss how the von Neumann entropies in both descriptions are related to the entropy computed by the island formula and coarse grained entropy. Moreover, we argue that the way operators transform between the two descriptions depends on their complexity. A simple toy model is introduced to demonstrate that a sufficiently complicated map between two descriptions of the system can give rise to an island formula and wormholes. Lastly, we speculate about the relation between double-holography and black hole complementarity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".