Eigenvalues and eigenvectors for a hermitian gaussian operator: Role of the Schrödinger-Robertson uncertainty relation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<abstract><p>The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a normalized gaussian operator do not seem to have been previously considered. I solve this problem for 1-dimensional translational systems. I also address the question as to whether a gaussian operator is a density operator. To answer that question, it is first necessary to be sure what conditions must be satisfied, so a short review of density operators is given. Since position and momentum do not commute in quantum mechanics, it is useful to start with the consequences of the noncommutation, which is generally the Schrödinger-Robertson uncertainty relation, which is also briefly reviewed. It is found that the question of whether a gaussian operator is a density operator is directly tied to this uncertainty relation. Since the Wigner function is the phase space representation of a translational density operator, it is natural to consider the gaussian phase space function associated with a gaussian operator and to compare the phase space and operator properties. Throughout such discussions, the independent parameters in these functions are the first and second moments of position and momentum. The application of this formalism to the free translation and spreading of a gaussian packet is given and shows the formal similarity between classical and quantum behavior, whereas the literature standardly only considers the pure state case (equivalent to a single wavefunction).</p></abstract>
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it