MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387097927 · doi:10.1007/jhep09(2023)167

Gravitation from optimized computation: Einstein and beyond

2023· article· en· W4387097927 on OpenAlexaff
Rafael Carrasco, Juan F. Pedraza, Andrew Svesko, Zachary Weller-Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSpacetimeGravitationQuantum gravityTheoretical physicsEinsteinQuantumClassical mechanicsLinearized gravityComputationDual polyhedronMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new principle in quantum gravity, dubbed spacetime complexity, states that gravitational physics emerges from spacetime seeking to optimize the computational cost of its quantum dynamics. Thus far, this principle has been realized at the linearized level, in holographic theories with Einstein gravity duals, assuming the so-called ‘Complexity-Volume’ (CV) proposal. We expand on this proof in two significant directions. First, we derive higher-derivative gravitational equations by including appropriate corrections to the CV dictionary. Second, we show semi-classical equations arise by considering the leading bulk quantum corrections to CV. Our proof is valid for two-dimensional dilaton gravities, where the problem of semi-classical backreaction can be solved exactly. However, we argue the principle should hold more generally, leading us to a concrete proposal for bulk complexity of perturbative excited states in arbitrary dimensions. Our results demonstrate the robustness of spacetime complexity as a guiding principle to understand gravity in terms of quantum computation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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