Bibliographic record
Abstract
The measurement problem of quantum mechanics concerns the question under which circumstances coherent wave evolution becomes disrupted to produce eigenstates of observables, instead of evolving superpositions of eigenstates. The problem needs to be addressed already within wave mechanics, before second quantization, because low-energy interactions can be dominated by particle-preserving potential interactions. We discuss a scattering array of harmonic oscillators which can detect particles penetrating the array through interaction with a short-range potential. Evolution of the wave function of scattered particles, combined with Heisenberg's assertion that quantum jumps persist in wave mechanics, indicates that the wave function will collapse around single oscillator sites if the scattering is inelastic, while it will not collapse around single sites for elastic scattering. The Born rule for position observation is then equivalent to the statement that the wave function for inelastic scattering amounts to an epistemic superposition of possible scattering states, in the sense that it describes a sum of probability amplitudes for inelastic scattering off different scattering centers, whereas at most one inelastic scattering event can happen at any moment in time. Within this epistemic interpretation of the wave function, the actual underlying inelastic scattering event corresponds to a quantum jump, whereas the continuously evolving wave function only describes the continuous evolution of probability amplitudes for scattering off different sites. Quantum jumps then yield definite position observations as defined by the spatial resolution of the oscillator array.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".