Bibliographic record
Abstract
We revisit the problem involving two constantly accelerating Unruh-DeWitt detectors using open effective field theory methods. We study the time evolution of the joint detector state using a Markovian approximation which differs from the standard one taken in the literature. We show that this Markovian limit already implies the complete positivity of the dynamical evolution map without invoking the rotating wave approximation (RWA), in contrast to standard derivations of open system master equations. By calculating explicitly the domain of validity of this Markovian approximation, we argue that the lack of complete positivity in the usual microscopic derivation stems from the (subtle) fact that the Redfield equation is used outside its domain of validity. We give two well-known cases studied in the literature that violate the validity of the Markovian approximation: (i) the ``stacked trajectory'' limit (when detector trajectories are taken to be on top of one another) and (ii) the large gap-to-acceleration ratio. Since Markovian dynamics with or without RWA can lead to different qualitative predictions for entanglement dynamics, our work emphasizes the need to properly track the regime of validity of all approximations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".