MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6979298739

Krylov exponents and power spectra for maximal quantum chaos: an EFT approach

2025· article· en· W6979298739 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHigh Energy PhysicsDeutsches Elektronen-SynchrotronVlaamse regeringAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUniversität HamburgFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsLyapunov exponentExponentQuantumSymmetry (geometry)Operator (biology)Field (mathematics)Lanczos resampling
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the effective field theory (EFT) of maximal chaos through the lens of Krylov complexity and the Universal Operator Growth Hypothesis. We test the relationship between two measures of quantum chaos: out-of-time-ordered correlators (OTOCs) and Krylov complexity. In the EFT, a shift symmetry of the hydrodynamic modes enforces the maximal Lyapunov exponent in OTOCs, $λ_L = 2πT$, while simultaneously constraining thermal two-point autocorrelators. We solve these constraints on the autocorrelator, and calculate the Lanczos coefficients and Krylov exponents for several examples, finding both $λ_K = λ_L$ and $λ_K = λ_L/2$. This demonstrates that, within the EFT, the shift symmetry alone is insufficient to enforce maximal Krylov exponents even when the Lyapunov exponent is maximal. In particular, this result suggests a tension with the conjectured bound $λ_L \leq λ_K \leq 2πT$. Finally, we identify autocorrelator solutions whose power spectra closely resemble the so-called thermal product formula seen in holographic systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207