MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389109733 · doi:10.1007/jhep11(2023)207

Holographic entanglement from the UV to the IR

2023· article· en· W4389109733 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xi Dong, Grant N. Remmen, Diandian Wang, Wayne W. Weng, Chih-Hung Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityHigh Energy PhysicsU.S. Department of EnergyUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraOffice of ScienceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuantum entanglementPhysicsHolographyRenormalization groupEntropy (arrow of time)Invariant (physics)ObservableQuantum mechanicsMathematical physicsQuantum field theoryTheoretical physicsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In AdS/CFT, observables on the boundary are invariant under renormalization group (RG) flow in the bulk. In this paper, we study holographic entanglement entropy under bulk RG flow and find that it is indeed invariant. We focus on tree-level RG flow, where massive fields in a UV theory are integrated out to give the IR theory. We explicitly show that in several simple examples, holographic entanglement entropy calculated in the UV theory agrees with that calculated in the IR theory. Moreover, we give an argument for this agreement to hold for general tree-level RG flow. Along the way, we generalize the replica method of calculating holographic entanglement entropy to bulk theories that include matter fields with nonzero spin.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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