MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392359000 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.065001

Ambient temperature versus ambient acceleration in the circular motion Unruh effect

2024· article· en· W4392359000 on OpenAlexafffund
Cameron R. D. Bunney, Leo Parry, T. Rick Perche, Jorma Louko

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Electrodynamics and Casimir Effect
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of CanadaUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsUnruh effectAccelerationPhysicsMotion (physics)MechanicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known that the experience of a linearly accelerated observer with acceleration a , interacting with a massless scalar field in its vacuum state in 3 + 1 Minkowski spacetime, is identical to that of a static observer interacting with a massless scalar field in a thermal state of temperature a / 2 π in 3 + 1 Minkowski spacetime. We study the robustness of this duality by comparing an observer undergoing circular motion in a thermal bath with an observer that undergoes circular motion around a linearly accelerated trajectory. We find that in most regimes, observers in these two cases experience the field in different ways, and are generally able to tell the difference between the two cases by measuring observables localized along their trajectories. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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 score0.028

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 studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.380 · 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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicQuantum Electrodynamics and Casimir EffectFrench-language works237,207