MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Entanglement negativity between separated regions in quantum critical systems

2024· article· en· W4396625993 on OpenAlexafffund
Gilles Parez, William Witczak‐Krempa

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCourtois FoundationCanada Research ChairsCentre de Recherches Mathématiques
KeywordsQuantum entanglementNegativity effectQuantumQuantum discordStatistical physicsPhysicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsPsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the entanglement between disjoint subregions in quantum critical systems through the lens of the logarithmic negativity. We work with systems in arbitrary dimensions, including conformal field theories and their corresponding lattice Hamiltonians, as well as resonating valence-bond states. At small separations, the logarithmic negativity is big and displays universal behavior, but we show nonperturbatively that it decays faster than any power at large separations. This can already be seen in the minimal setting of single-spin subregions. The corresponding absence of distillable entanglement at large separations generalizes the one-dimensional result, and indicates that quantum critical ground states do not possess long-range bipartite entanglement, at least for bosons. For systems with fermions, a more suitable definition of the logarithmic negativity exists that takes into account fermion parity, and we show that it decays algebraically. Along the way we obtain general results for the moments of the partially transposed density matrix. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations25
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ResearchSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207