Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 80 references

Privacy-Preserving Driver Drowsiness Detection with Spatial Self-Attention and Federated Learning

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Quantum superposition of black-hole masses enhances entanglement harvesting via constructive field-mode interference.

desk verdict The file behind arXiv:2508.00287 is actually a gr-qc paper on entanglement harvesting in mass-superposed BTZ spacetimes, not the drowsiness-detection paper in the abstract; the physics itself is a solid, citable extension but the 'always greater' entanglement claim is overbroad and contradicted by the paper's own equations in the large-mass-ratio limit. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.00287 v2 pith:4FQLVGVB submitted 2025-08-01 cs.CV

Tran Viet Khoa , Do Hai Son , Mohammad Abu Alsheikh , Yibeltal F Alem , Dinh Thai Hoang This is my paper
classification cs.CV MSC 81T2081P4083C57
keywords entanglementharvestingmutualinformationUnruh-DeWittdetectorsBTZblackholespacetimesuperpositionmass-superposedquantumcontrolrelativistic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks whether the quantum superposition of spacetime geometries leaves a detectable signature in the correlations that particle detectors extract from a quantum field. Using two Unruh-DeWitt detectors (point-like detectors coupled to the field) in a BTZ black hole whose mass is prepared in a superposition of two values, it claims that the superposed spacetime creates constructive interference between field modes, so the harvested entanglement is always greater than in either single-mass spacetime. For mutual information the picture is distance-dependent: at small separations the superposed spacetime yields less than a single spacetime, while at larger separations it surpasses the single-spacetime value for certain mass ratios. In both cases the harvested correlations are largest when the final measurement of the spacetime control state matches the initially prepared superposition. The significance is that correlation harvesting could serve as an operational, bottom-up probe of quantum-gravitational effects.

What carries the argument

The central object is the quantum-controlled field operator, $\hat{\phi}(x)=\sum_{i=1,2} \hat{\phi}_{M_i}(x)\otimes |M_i\rangle\langle M_i|$, which treats the black-hole mass as a control qubit: the field is conditioned on the mass state, so the two spacetimes interfere at the level of the detector's interaction. This generates the cross-spacetime Wightman function $W^{M_1 M_2}_{\rm BTZ}$ and the interference terms $P^{M_1 M_2}_D$ and $M$ that enter the two-detector density matrix. From that matrix the paper computes concurrence $C=2\max(0, |M|-\sqrt{P_A P_B})$ and mutual information, and finds that the cross terms are what make the superposed results exceed the single-spacetime baselines. Resonances at rational $\sqrt{M_2/M_1}$ arise from the two isometries $\Gamma_{M_1}$ and $\Gamma_{M_2}$ acting on the AdS$_3$ modes.

What would settle it

Compute the concurrence with the cross-spacetime interference term $W^{M_1M_2}$ removed while keeping everything else fixed: if the enhancement over a single spacetime persists, the constructive-interference explanation is wrong; if it disappears, the enhancement is exactly the interference contribution. A second check would be an experiment or numerical simulation that prepares a coherent superposition of two metrics and measures the detector transition probability: the model predicts sharp resonant peaks at rational ratios $\sqrt{M_2/M_1}$, so a smooth, peak-free spectrum would falsify the quantum-control model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that spacetime superposition enhances harvesting through constructive interference: the concurrence (an entanglement measure) between two detectors interacting with a mass-superposed BTZ black hole is larger than the concurrence obtained in either single-mass BTZ spacetime, for every detector separation considered. This follows because the cross-spacetime Wightman function $W^{M_1 M_2}_{\rm BTZ}$ contributes an interference term that adds to the diagonal single-mass contributions rather than averaging them away. The detected signal is resonant: entanglement and mutual information peak at rational values of $\sqrt{M_2/M_1}$, for example 1, 1.2, and 1.5, reflecting constructive interference among field modes in the topologically closed anti-de Sitter space. Mutual information behaves differently from entanglement: it is suppressed relative to a single spacetime at small detector separations and only exceeds it at larger separations for specific mass ratios, because mutual information depends on local transition probabilities as well as the correlation term. Finally, the harvesting efficiency depends on the measurement basis of the spacetime control state, with maxima at $\theta=\varphi$, namely when the final control state coincides with the initial superposition.

Load-bearing premise

The results rest on modeling the superposition of spacetimes as a quantum control: the mass of the black hole is a qubit, and the field operator is conditioned on that qubit, so the detector feels both spacetimes simultaneously and their modes interfere.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Entanglement harvesting becomes a direct probe of spacetime superposition: the extra entanglement extracted from a mass-superposed BTZ black hole is a measurable, interference-driven signal.
  • The resonant spectrum at rational $\sqrt{M_2/M_1}$ gives a discrete fingerprint that distinguishes a coherent superposition from a classical mixture of masses.
  • Mutual information harvesting has a crossover in detector separation, so experiments comparing quantum versus total correlations can separate the interference effect from local thermal effects.
  • Post-selecting on the spacetime control state matters: only measurements aligned with the prepared superposition ($\theta=\varphi$) maximize both concurrence and mutual information.
  • The framework connects quantum-gravity phenomenology to relativistic quantum information, implying that detector pairs can in principle certify nonclassical spacetime structure without a full theory of quantum gravity.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper does not discuss decoherence of the mass control; if environmental noise destroys the coherence between $|M_1\rangle$ and $|M_2\rangle$, the cross terms decay and the harvested correlations should reduce to a mixture of single-spacetime results, a prediction that could be tested by adding a decoherence rate to the density matrix.
  • The same quantum-control formalism could be carried over to superpositions of detector trajectories or to other spacetimes such as de Sitter or Schwarzschild; the expectation is that the distance-dependent crossover seen in mutual information is a generic feature whenever the correlation term and transition probabilities scale differently.
  • A concrete experimental route would be an analogue-gravity simulation, for example a Bose-Einstein condensate or waveguide lattice, that implements two metric backgrounds and a superposition: the predicted rational-ratio resonances would be the observable target.
  • The paper fixes detectors on the same axis; scanning the angular separation $\Delta\phi$ and the detector energy gap $\Omega$ would map where the entanglement enhancement survives, which the authors left for future work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies two Unruh-DeWitt detectors coupled to a massless scalar field on a quantum superposition of two BTZ black-hole spacetimes with masses M1 and M2. The field operator is assumed to be controlled by the black-hole mass state, Eq. (4), and the detector state is computed to second order in the coupling via a Dyson series. The authors then evaluate the concurrence and mutual information harvested by the detectors as functions of the mass ratio, detector separation, boundary conditions, and the angles θ and φ that parametrize the initial and final superposition states of the spacetime. The principal claims are that entanglement harvesting is 'always greater' in the superposed spacetime than in a single spacetime, that mutual-information harvesting is lower at small separation but exceeds the single-spacetime value for specific mass ratios as the separation grows, and that both harvested correlations are maximal when the final measured spacetime state matches the initially prepared state (θ = φ).

Significance. If the main claims held, the paper would be a useful extension of relativistic quantum information to spacetimes in quantum superposition, complementing recent work on superposed BTZ black holes and superposed Minkowski spacetime. The Dyson-series framework, the use of the superposed BTZ Wightman function, and the standard concurrence and mutual-information formulas are clearly laid out, and the special-case checks that reproduce the single-detector results of Ref. [67] provide a good consistency test. The paper also gives an explicit numerical procedure for the Wightman-function integrals in the appendices. The main limitations are that the central comparison to 'single spacetime' is never made quantitative and that one of the paper's own asymptotic limits appears to contradict the universal enhancement claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. IV A, Eqs. (18), (20), (26)] The claim that the concurrence in the superposed spacetime is 'always greater' than in a single spacetime is not supported by the numerical scan and is contradicted by the paper's own formulas in the large-mass-ratio limit. For θ = φ = π/4, Eqs. (18) and (20) give P_D^sup = (P_D^M1 + P_D^M2 + 2 P_D^cross)/4 and M^sup = (M^M1 + M^M2)/2. When √(M2/M1) → ∞, the paper states that P_D^cross decays, so the M2 branch dominates: P_D^sup ≈ P_D^M2/4 and M^sup ≈ M^M2/2. Inserting this into Eq. (26) gives C^sup ≈ |M^M2| - √(P_A^M2 P_B^M2)/2, whereas a single M2 spacetime gives C^M2 = 2(|M^M2| - √(P_A^M2 P_B^M2)). Hence C^sup < C^M2 whenever 2|M^M2| > 3√(P_A^M2 P_B^M2), which is exactly the regime where the single-M2 state is non-trivially entangled. Thus the 'always greater' statement is asymptotically false within the model. In addition, no single-spacetime baseline curves are shown in Figs. 2 and 3, so even the displayed range cannot verify the comparison.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (24), Appendix C, Figs. 4 and 7] The normalization used to pass from the unnormalized density matrix (16) to the normalized form (24) is derived in Appendix C only for the special case θ = φ; the appendix states this explicitly. For general θ ≠ φ, the zeroth-order trace of the conditional detector state is (a+b)^2 = cos^2(θ-φ), so the correctly normalized entries are, for example, \tilde P_D = P_D / cos^2(θ-φ) + O(λ^4), not P_D + O(λ^4) as stated in Eq. (C3). Figures 4 and 7 vary θ and φ independently, so for θ ≠ φ they are based on an incorrectly normalized density matrix. The quantitative claim that concurrence and mutual information are maximal at θ = φ is therefore not reliable as presented.
  3. [Sec. IV B, Figs. 5 and 6] The mutual-information comparison between superposed and single-spacetime configurations is not quantitatively controlled. The text claims that for small separations the superposed mutual information is consistently less than in a single spacetime and that for larger separations it surpasses the single-spacetime value for specific mass ratios, but no single-spacetime curves are plotted and the 'single spacetime' comparator is never defined (M1, M2, or some averaged geometry). Without these baselines, the claimed crossover cannot be verified from the data presented.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Metadata] The manuscript metadata (title and abstract) refer to a driver-drowsiness-detection paper, while the body is the BTZ correlation-harvesting manuscript. This mismatch must be corrected before resubmission.
  2. [Eq. (2) and Appendix B] The symbol η is used both for the twist parameter in Eq. (2) and for the redshift factor η^{M_i}_D introduced in Appendix B. This notational clash is confusing and should be resolved.
  3. [Ref. [78]] The reference for mutual information is a cryptography paper; a standard information-theory textbook or a standard quantum-information reference would be more appropriate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the correlation-harvesting results follow from the UDW interaction model and independently derived Wightman functions, not from a fitted parameter or self-citation chain.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained relative to its stated assumptions. Eq. (4) introduces the quantum-control model for the field on mass-superposed BTZ spacetime as an explicit construction; this is an assumption, not a consequence of the results. The transition probabilities (Eq. 18), off-diagonal correlation terms (Eqs. 19-20), and concurrence/mutual information (Eqs. 26-27) are then obtained by standard second-order Dyson expansion of the UDW interaction and by tracing out the field, with the cross-Wightman function taken from Ref. [67] (external to the authors) and the single-spacetime Wightman functions from standard BTZ field theory. No parameter is fitted to the target enhancement, and the single-detector consistency check with [67] is a benchmark, not a reuse of the two-detector claim. The 'always greater' entanglement statement in Sec. IV A is not backed by a defined single-spacetime baseline and may be incorrect for large mass ratios, but that is an unsupported-claim/correctness issue rather than circularity: the formulas do not define the comparison into the output. Self-citations such as Refs. [29,48] appear only as background or consistency checks and do not carry the derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted free parameters; all physical inputs (masses, detector gap, switching width, radii, boundary condition) are chosen for the numerical scans and are not tuned to match an external dataset. The key structural assumptions are the control-system model of spacetime superposition (Eq. 4) and the neglect of the complex phase in the superposition state (Eq. 13). No new entities with independent falsifiable handles are introduced beyond the mass-superposition framework already present in ref. [67].

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The field operator on a superposition of spacetimes is phi-hat(x) = sum_{i=1,2} phi-hat_{Mi}(x) tensor |Mi><Mi|, treating the black hole mass as a quantum control.
    Introduced in Eq. (4); this is the core modeling step that defines what 'spacetime superposition' means operationally for the field.
  • domain assumption The initial spacetime state is |s_i> = cos(theta)|M1> + sin(theta)|M2> with real coefficients, neglecting a complex phase.
    Eq. (13) and the text after it explicitly state the complex phase is neglected; this restricts the parameter space but preserves the interference mechanism.
  • domain assumption The detectors interact via the Unruh-DeWitt Hamiltonian with Gaussian switching, start in their ground states, and the field is in the AdS3 vacuum.
    Section III and Eq. (12); standard detector model assumptions used throughout the harvesting literature.
  • standard math BTZ spacetime is realized as a quotient of AdS3, and automorphic field Wightman functions are given by the sum in Eq. (3), following refs. [68-70].
    Section II; standard results in BTZ quantum field theory.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Privacy-Preserving Driver Drowsiness Detection with Spatial Self-Attention and Federated Learning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4FQLVGVB

@misc{pith2026250800287,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Privacy-Preserving Driver Drowsiness Detection with Spatial Self-Attention and Federated Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4FQLVGVB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.00287}
}
read the original abstract

Driver drowsiness is one of the main causes of road accidents and is recognized as a leading contributor to traffic-related fatalities. However, detecting drowsiness accurately remains a challenging task, especially in real-world settings where facial data from different individuals is decentralized and highly diverse. In this paper, we propose a novel framework for drowsiness detection that is designed to work effectively with heterogeneous and decentralized data. Our approach develops a new Spatial Self-Attention (SSA) mechanism integrated with a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network to better extract key facial features and improve detection performance. To support federated learning, we employ a Gradient Similarity Comparison (GSC) that selects the most relevant trained models from different operators before aggregation. This improves the accuracy and robustness of the global model while preserving user privacy. We also develop a customized tool that automatically processes video data by extracting frames, detecting and cropping faces, and applying data augmentation techniques such as rotation, flipping, brightness adjustment, and zooming. Experimental results show that our framework achieves a detection accuracy of 89.9% in the federated learning settings, outperforming existing methods under various deployment scenarios. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in handling real-world data variability and highlight its potential for deployment in intelligent transportation systems to enhance road safety through early and reliable drowsiness detection.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [67]

    J. Foo, C. S. Arabaci, M. Zych, and R. B. Mann, Quantum Sig- natures of Black Hole Mass Superpositions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 181301 (2022), arXiv:2111.13315 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2022

  2. [1]

    Reeh and S

    H. Reeh and S. Schlieder, Bemerkungen zur unit ¨ar¨aquivalenz von lorentzinvarianten feldern, Nuovo Cim.22, 1051 (1961)

    work page 1961

  3. [2]

    Valentini, Non-local correlations in quantum electrodynam- ics, Phys

    A. Valentini, Non-local correlations in quantum electrodynam- ics, Phys. Lett. A153, 321 (1991)

    work page 1991

  4. [3]

    Reznik, Entanglement from the vacuum, Found

    B. Reznik, Entanglement from the vacuum, Found. Phys.33, 167 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0212044

    arXiv 2003

  5. [4]

    Reznik, A

    B. Reznik, A. Retzker, and J. Silman, Violating Bell’s in- equalities in the vacuum, Phys. Rev. A71, 042104 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0310058

    arXiv 2005

  6. [5]

    Salton, R

    G. Salton, R. B. Mann, and N. C. Menicucci, Acceleration- assisted entanglement harvesting and rangefinding, New J. Phys.17, 035001 (2015), arXiv:1408.1395 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2015

  7. [6]

    Pozas-Kerstjens and E

    A. Pozas-Kerstjens and E. Martin-Martinez, Harvesting corre- lations from the quantum vacuum, Phys. Rev. D92, 064042 (2015), arXiv:1506.03081 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2015

  8. [7]

    L. J. Henderson, R. A. Hennigar, R. B. Mann, A. R. H. Smith, and J. Zhang, Harvesting Entanglement from the Black Hole Vacuum, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 21LT02 (2018), arXiv:1712.10018 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 80 references
  1. [8]

    Fuentes-Schuller and R

    I. Fuentes-Schuller and R. B. Mann, Alice falls into a black hole: Entanglement in non-inertial frames, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 120404 (2005), arXiv:0410172 [quant-ph]

    2005

  2. [9]

    D. Ahn, Y . H. Moon, R. B. Mann, and I. Fuentes-Schuller, The Black hole final state for the Dirac fields In Schwarzschild spacetime, JHEP06, 062, arXiv:0801.0471 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  3. [10]

    Y . Zhou, J. Hu, and H. Yu, Steady-state entanglement for rotat- ing Unruh-DeWitt detectors, Phys. Rev. D106, 105028 (2022)

    2022

  4. [11]

    Zhang and H

    J. Zhang and H. Yu, Entanglement harvesting for Unruh-DeWitt detectors in circular motion, Phys. Rev. D102, 065013 (2020), arXiv:2008.07980 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Gallock-Yoshimura, E

    K. Gallock-Yoshimura, E. Tjoa, and R. B. Mann, Harvesting entanglement with detectors freely falling into a black hole, Phys. Rev. D104, 025001 (2021), arXiv:2102.09573 [quant- ph]

    2021 arXiv

  6. [13]

    W. Cong, E. Tjoa, and R. B. Mann, Entanglement Harvesting with Moving Mirrors, JHEP06, 021, [Erratum: JHEP 07, 051 (2019)], arXiv:1810.07359 [quant-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Svidzinsky, Time reflection of light from a quantum perspec- tive and vacuum entanglement, Opt

    A. Svidzinsky, Time reflection of light from a quantum perspec- tive and vacuum entanglement, Opt. Express32, 15623 (2024)

    2024

  8. [15]

    Kukita and Y

    S. Kukita and Y . Nambu, Harvesting large scale entanglement in de Sitter space with multiple detectors, Entropy19, 449 (2017), arXiv:1708.01359 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Q. Xu, S. A. Ahmad, and A. R. H. Smith, Gravitational waves affect vacuum entanglement, Phys. Rev. D102, 065019 (2020), arXiv:2006.11301 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Tjoa and R

    E. Tjoa and R. B. Mann, Harvesting correlations in Schwarzschild and collapsing shell spacetimes, JHEP08, 155, arXiv:2007.02955 [quant-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  11. [18]

    J. Foo, S. Onoe, R. B. Mann, and M. Zych, Thermality, causal- ity, and the quantum-controlled Unruh–deWitt detector, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 043056 (2021), arXiv:2005.03914 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [19]

    J. Foo, S. Onoe, and M. Zych, Unruh-deWitt detectors in quan- tum superpositions of trajectories, Phys. Rev. D102, 085013 (2020), arXiv:2003.12774 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Y . Zhou, J. Hu, and H. Yu, Entanglement dynamics for Unruh- DeWitt detectors interacting with massive scalar fields: the Un- ruh and anti-Unruh effects, JHEP09, 088, arXiv:2105.14735 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  14. [21]

    Wu, C.-X

    S.-M. Wu, C.-X. Wang, D.-D. Liu, X.-L. Huang, and H.-S. Zeng, Would quantum coherence be increased by curvature ef- fect in de Sitter space?, JHEP02, 115, arXiv:2207.11721 [gr- qc]

    arXiv

  15. [22]

    S. M. Wu and H. S. Zeng, Genuine tripartite nonlocality and entanglement in curved spacetime, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 4 (2022), arXiv:2201.02333 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Y . Chen, J. Hu, and H. Yu, Collective transitions of two entan- 12 gled atoms near a Schwarzschild black hole, Phys. Rev. D107, 025015 (2023)

    2023

  17. [24]

    S. M. Wu, X. W. Fan, R. D. Wang, H. Y . Wu, X. L. Huang, and H. S. Zeng, Does Hawking effect always degrade fidelity of quantum teleportation in Schwarzschild spacetime?, JHEP11, 232, arXiv:2304.00984 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  18. [25]

    S. M. Wu, X. W. Teng, J. X. Li, S. H. Li, T. H. Liu, and J. Wang, Genuinely accessible and inaccessible entanglement in Schwarzschild black hole, Phys. Lett. B848, 138334 (2024), arXiv:2311.12362 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Li and S.-M

    W.-M. Li and S.-M. Wu, Bosonic and fermionic coherence of N-partite states in the background of a dilaton black hole, JHEP 09, 144, arXiv:2407.07688 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  20. [27]

    Q. Liu, T. Liu, C. Wen, and J. Wang, Optimal quantum strategy for locating Unruh channels, Phys. Rev. A110, 022428 (2024), arXiv:2404.19216 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [28]

    X. Liu, C. Zeng, and J. Wang, Generation of quantum entangle- ment in superposed diamond spacetime, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 539 (2025), arXiv:2501.00246 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Y . Tang, W. Liu, and J. Wang, Observational signature of Lorentz violation in acceleration radiation, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1108 (2025), arXiv:2502.03043 [gr-qc]

    2025

  23. [30]

    Li, S.-H

    S.-H. Li, S.-H. Shang, and S.-M. Wu, Does acceleration always degrade quantum entanglement for tetrapartite Unruh-DeWitt detectors?, JHEP05, 214, arXiv:2502.05881 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    Wu, R.-D

    S.-M. Wu, R.-D. Wang, X.-L. Huang, and Z. Wang, Does grav- itational wave assist vacuum steering and Bell nonlocality?, JHEP07, 155, arXiv:2405.07235 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  25. [32]

    W. Liu, C. Wen, and J. Wang, Lorentz violation alleviates grav- itationally induced entanglement degradation, JHEP01, 184, arXiv:2410.21681 [gr-qc]

    arXiv

  26. [33]

    G. L. Ver Steeg and N. C. Menicucci, Entangling power of an expanding universe, Phys. Rev. D79, 044027 (2009), arXiv:0711.3066 [quant-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  27. [34]

    L. J. Henderson, R. A. Hennigar, R. B. Mann, A. R. H. Smith, and J. Zhang, Entangling detectors in anti-de Sitter space, JHEP 05, 178, arXiv:1809.06862 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  28. [35]

    K. K. Ng, R. B. Mann, and E. Mart ´ın-Mart´ınez, Unruh-DeWitt detectors and entanglement: The anti–de Sitter space, Phys. Rev. D98, 125005 (2018), arXiv:1809.06878 [quant-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Martin-Martinez, A

    E. Martin-Martinez, A. R. H. Smith, and D. R. Terno, Space- time structure and vacuum entanglement, Phys. Rev. D93, 044001 (2016), arXiv:1507.02688 [quant-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  30. [37]

    M. P. G. Robbins, L. J. Henderson, and R. B. Mann, Entan- glement amplification from rotating black holes, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 02LT01 (2022), arXiv:2010.14517 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [38]

    L. J. Henderson, S. Y . Ding, and R. B. Mann, Entanglement harvesting with a twist, A VS Quantum Sci.4, 014402 (2022), arXiv:2201.11130 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  32. [39]

    W. Cong, C. Qian, M. R. R. Good, and R. B. Mann, Ef- fects of Horizons on Entanglement Harvesting, JHEP10, 067, arXiv:2006.01720 [gr-qc]

    2006 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Z. Liu, J. Zhang, and H. Yu, Entanglement harvesting of accel- erated detectors versus static ones in a thermal bath, Phys. Rev. D107, 045010 (2023), arXiv:2208.14825 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Maeso-Garc ´ıa, J

    H. Maeso-Garc ´ıa, J. Polo-G ´omez, and E. Mart ´ın-Mart´ınez, How measuring a quantum field affects entanglement har- vesting, Phys. Rev. D107, 045011 (2023), arXiv:2210.05692 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Z. Liu, J. Zhang, and H. Yu, Harvesting correlations from vac- uum quantum fields in the presence of a reflecting boundary, JHEP11, 184, arXiv:2310.07164 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  36. [43]

    Lindel, A

    F. Lindel, A. Herter, V . Gebhart, J. Faist, and S. Y . Buhmann, Entanglement harvesting from electromagnetic quantum fields, Phys. Rev. A110, 022414 (2024), arXiv:2311.04642 [quant- ph]

    2024 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Y . Ji, J. Zhang, and H. Yu, Entanglement harvesting in cosmic string spacetime, JHEP06, 161, arXiv:2401.13406 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  38. [45]

    Wu, R.-D

    S.-M. Wu, R.-D. Wang, X.-L. Huang, and Z. Wang, Harvesting asymmetric steering via non-identical detectors, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 708 (2025), arXiv:2408.11277 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Naeem, K

    M. Naeem, K. Gallock-Yoshimura, and R. B. Mann, Mutual information harvested by uniformly accelerated particle de- tectors, Phys. Rev. D107, 065016 (2023), arXiv:2212.12546 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Bueley, L

    K. Bueley, L. Huang, K. Gallock-Yoshimura, and R. B. Mann, Harvesting mutual information from BTZ black hole spacetime, Phys. Rev. D106, 025010 (2022), arXiv:2205.07891 [quant- ph]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [48]

    X. Liu, W. Liu, Z. Liu, and J. Wang, Harvesting correlations from BTZ black hole coupled to a Lorentz-violating vector field, JHEP08, 094, arXiv:2503.06404 [gr-qc]

  42. [49]

    Chakraborty, L

    A. Chakraborty, L. Hackl, and M. Zych, Entanglement har- vesting in quantum superposed spacetime, Phys. Rev. D111, 104052 (2025), arXiv:2412.15870 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Aharony, S

    O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri, and Y . Oz, Large N field theories, string theory and gravity, Phys. Rept.323, 183 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/9905111

    2000 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Berkovits, Super Poincare covariant quantization of the su- perstring, JHEP04, 018, arXiv:hep-th/0001035

    N. Berkovits, Super Poincare covariant quantization of the su- perstring, JHEP04, 018, arXiv:hep-th/0001035

    arXiv

  45. [52]

    Surya, The causal set approach to quantum gravity, Living Rev

    S. Surya, The causal set approach to quantum gravity, Living Rev. Rel.22, 5 (2019), arXiv:1903.11544 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Lewandowski, Y

    J. Lewandowski, Y . Ma, J. Yang, and C. Zhang, Quantum Oppenheimer-Snyder and Swiss Cheese Models, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 101501 (2023), arXiv:2210.02253 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Lewandowski, Y . Ma, and J. Yang, Black holes and covariance in effective quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D111, L081504 (2025), arXiv:2407.10168 [gr-qc]

    2025

  48. [55]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Lewandowski, Y . Ma, and J. Yang, Black holes and covariance in effective quantum gravity: A solution with- out Cauchy horizons, Phys. Rev. D112, 044054 (2025), arXiv:2412.02487 [gr-qc]

    2025

  49. [56]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Light rings and shadows of static black holes in effective quantum gravity, Phys. Lett. B858, 139052 (2024), arXiv:2408.05569 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  50. [57]

    W. Liu, D. Wu, and J. Wang, Light rings and shadows of static black holes in effective quantum gravity II: A new solution without Cauchy horizons, Phys. Lett. B868, 139742 (2025), arXiv:2412.18083 [gr-qc]

    2025

  51. [58]

    L. J. Henderson, A. Belenchia, E. Castro-Ruiz, C. Budroni, M. Zych, ˇC. Brukner, and R. B. Mann, Quantum Temporal Su- perposition: The Case of Quantum Field Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 131602 (2020), arXiv:2002.06208 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Giacomini and ˇC

    F. Giacomini and ˇC. Brukner, Einstein’s Equivalence principle for superpositions of gravitational fields and quantum reference frames, (2020), arXiv:2012.13754 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  53. [60]

    Giacomini and ˇC

    F. Giacomini and ˇC. Brukner, Quantum superposition of space- times obeys Einstein’s equivalence principle, A VS Quantum Sci.4, 015601 (2022), arXiv:2109.01405 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  54. [61]

    A. R. H. Smith and M. Ahmadi, Quantum clocks observe clas- sical and quantum time dilation, Nature Commun.11, 5360 (2020), arXiv:1904.12390 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  55. [62]

    Kempf, Replacing the Notion of Spacetime Distance by the Notion of Correlation, Front

    A. Kempf, Replacing the Notion of Spacetime Distance by the Notion of Correlation, Front. in Phys.9, 247 (2021), arXiv:2110.08278 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  56. [63]

    M. Zych, F. Costa, I. Pikovski, and ˇC. Brukner, Bell’s the- orem for temporal order, Nature Commun.10, 3772 (2019), arXiv:1708.00248 [quant-ph]. 13

    2019 arXiv

  57. [64]

    Christodoulou and C

    M. Christodoulou and C. Rovelli, On the possibility of labora- tory evidence for quantum superposition of geometries, Phys. Lett. B792, 64 (2019), arXiv:1808.05842 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Belenchia, R

    A. Belenchia, R. M. Wald, F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, ˇC. Brukner, and M. Aspelmeyer, Quantum Superposition of Massive Objects and the Quantization of Gravity, Phys. Rev. D98, 126009 (2018), arXiv:1807.07015 [quant-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [66]

    Giacomini, Spacetime Quantum Reference Frames and superpositions of proper times, Quantum5, 508 (2021), arXiv:2101.11628 [quant-ph]

    F. Giacomini, Spacetime Quantum Reference Frames and superpositions of proper times, Quantum5, 508 (2021), arXiv:2101.11628 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Banados, C

    M. Banados, C. Teitelboim, and J. Zanelli, The Black hole in three-dimensional space-time, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 1849 (1992), arXiv:hep-th/9204099

    1992 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Banados, M

    M. Banados, M. Henneaux, C. Teitelboim, and J. Zanelli, Geometry of the (2+1) black hole, Phys. Rev. D48, 1506 (1993), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 88, 069902 (2013)], arXiv:gr- qc/9302012

    1993

  62. [70]

    Lifschytz and M

    G. Lifschytz and M. Ortiz, Scalar field quantization on the (2+1)-dimensional black hole background, Phys. Rev. D49, 1929 (1994), arXiv:gr-qc/9310008

    1994 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Zhang and B

    H. Zhang and B. Zhang, Quantum correlation and origin of Hawking radiation for mass-superposed BTZ black holes, Phys. Rev. D111, 085007 (2025), arXiv:2406.17327 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  64. [72]

    W. G. Unruh, Notes on black hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976)

    1976

  65. [73]

    B. S. DeWitt, QUANTUM GRA VITY: THE NEW SYNTHE- SIS, inGeneral Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey (1980) pp. 680–745

    1980

  66. [74]

    Mart ´ın-Mart´ınez and P

    E. Mart ´ın-Mart´ınez and P. Rodriguez-Lopez, Relativistic quantum optics: The relativistic invariance of the light- matter interaction models, Phys. Rev. D97, 105026 (2018), arXiv:1803.01867 [quant-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Mart ´ın-Mart´ınez, T

    E. Mart ´ın-Mart´ınez, T. R. Perche, and B. de S. L. Torres, Gen- eral Relativistic Quantum Optics: Finite-size particle detector models in curved spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D101, 045017 (2020), arXiv:2001.10010 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Hill and W

    S. Hill and W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 5022 (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9703041

    1997 arXiv

  69. [77]

    W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary state of two qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 2245 (1998), arXiv:quant- ph/9709029

    1998

  70. [78]

    Veyrat-Charvillon and F.-X

    N. Veyrat-Charvillon and F.-X. Standaert, Mutual Information Analysis: How, When and Why?, inCryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems - CHES 2009(Springer Berlin Heidel- berg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009) pp. 429–443

    2009

  71. [79]

    Ollivier and W

    H. Ollivier and W. H. Zurek, Introducing Quantum Discord, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 017901 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0105072

    2001 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Henderson and V

    L. Henderson and V . Vedral, Classical, quantum and total cor- relations, J. Phys. A34, 6899 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0105028

    2001 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.