MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402308393 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.065003

Quantum reference frames from top-down crossed products

2024· article· en· W4402308393 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shadi Ali Ahmad, Wissam Chemissany, Marc S. Klinger, Robert G. Leigh

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMechanical and Optical Resonators
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSemiclassical physicsReference frameProduct (mathematics)Object (grammar)Pure mathematicsQuantumAlgebra over a fieldFrame (networking)MathematicsTheoretical physicsComputer sciencePhysicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All physical observations are made relative to a reference frame, which is a system in its own right. If the system of interest admits a group symmetry, the reference frame observing it must transform commensurately under the group to ensure the covariance of the combined system. We point out that the crossed product is a way to realize quantum reference frames from the bottom-up; adjoining a quantum reference frame and imposing constraints generates a crossed product algebra. We provide a top-down specification of crossed product algebras and show that one cannot obtain inequivalent quantum reference frames using this approach. As a remedy, we define an abstract algebra associated to the system and symmetry group built out of relational crossed product algebras associated with different choices of quantum reference frames. We term this object the <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <a:mi>G</a:mi> </a:math> -framed algebra, and show how potentially inequivalent frames are realized within this object. We comment on this algebra’s analog of the classical Gribov problem in gauge theory, its importance in gravity where we show that it is relevant for semiclassical de Sitter and potentially beyond the semiclassical limit, and its utility for understanding the frame dependence of physical notions like observables, density states, and entropies. 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.007

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.389 · 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

Citations22
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicMechanical and Optical ResonatorsFrench-language works237,207