Conceptual and formal groundwork for the study of resource dependence relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Different properties of a state may make it resourceful for different purposes, and the value taken by one or more of these properties may constrain the values that can be taken by the rest. For example, the phenomenon known as the monogamy of entanglement, which plays a crucial role in quantum cryptography and communication, describes a trade-off among different entanglement properties of a multipartite state. In this article, we lay out the conceptual and formal groundwork for the study of resource dependence relations, and we illustrate how to fully characterize them with a concrete example. We consider three resource theories concerning the about-face asymmetry properties of a qubit along three mutually orthogonal axes on the Bloch ball, where the about-face symmetry group consists of the identity map and a π rotation about the given axis. We derive a complete set of monotones for each of these resource theories and determine all of the relations that hold among them, thereby fully characterizing the resource dependence relations. In spite of the relative simplicity of the individual resource orderings in this example, these relations are already quite nuanced.
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 | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".