Taxonomy for physics beyond quantum mechanics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose terminology to classify interpretations of quantum mechanics and models that modify or complete quantum mechanics. Our focus is on models which have previously been referred to as superdeterministic (strong or weak), retrocausal (with or without signalling, dynamical or non-dynamical), future-input-dependent, atemporal and all-at-once, not always with the same meaning or context. Sometimes, these models are assumed to be deterministic, sometimes not, the word deterministic has been given different meanings, and different notions of causality have been used when classifying them. This has created much confusion in the literature, and we hope that the terms proposed here will help to clarify the nomenclature. The general model framework that we will propose may also be useful to classify other interpretations and modifications of quantum mechanics. This document grew out of the discussions at the 2022 Bonn Workshop on Superdeterminism and Retrocausality.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".