Reply to the Comment on ‘The operational foundations of PT-symmetric and quasi-Hermitian quantum theory’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This document is our reply to the Comment (Miloslav Znojil 2023 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56 038001) on our recent work titled ‘The operational foundations of PT-symmetric and quasi-Hermitian quantum theory’. The original Comment consists of three addenda to our work. The first addendum claims that our work is ill-motivated as the motivating question, namely whether PT-symmetric quantum theory extends the standard quantum theory, was already answered in the literature. The second addendum points to some missing references in our work, and the third addendum suggests what constraints could lead to an extension of standard quantum theory. In our reply, we explain that the claim in the first addendum is a result of a misinterpretation of our motivating question. When interpreted correctly, the third addendum in the Comment in itself elaborates on why our motivating question is interesting and relevant. We also briefly comment on the prospects of an extension of standard quantum theory along the lines suggested in the third addendum. As our response to the second addendum, we explain our rationale behind citing certain references while leaving out others.
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 | 0.012 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.045 | 0.059 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
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".