MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385144677 · doi:10.1007/jhep07(2023)162

The cosmological switchback effect

2023· article· en· W4385144677 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefano Baiguera, Rotem Berman, Shira Chapman, Robert C. Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftGovernment of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science FoundationSimons Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsHorizonAdS black holeDe Sitter universeTheoretical physicsPerturbation (astronomy)SpacetimeApparent horizonInverseHolographyMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsUniverseGeometryEvent horizon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The volume behind the black hole horizon was suggested as a holographic dual for the quantum computational complexity of the boundary state in AdS/CFT. This identification is strongly motivated by the switchback effect: a characteristic delay of complexity growth in reaction to an inserted perturbation, modelled as a shockwave in the bulk. Recent proposals of de Sitter (dS) holography suggest that a dual theory could be living on a stretched horizon near the cosmological horizon. We study how the spacetime volume behind the cosmological horizon in Schwarzschild-dS space reacts to the insertion of shockwaves in an attempt to characterize the properties of this dual theory. We demonstrate that a switchback effect can be observed in dS space. That is, the growth of complexity is delayed in reaction to a perturbation. This delay is longer for earlier shocks and depends on a scrambling time which is logarithmic in the strength of the shockwave and proportional to the inverse temperature of the cosmological dS horizon. This behavior is very similar to what happens for AdS black holes, albeit the geometric origin of the effect is somewhat different.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy Physics→Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→