OBC`

Provisional v2 view — RES not wired

Generated by docs/atlas/generate.jl — a pure VIEW over the *_registry.jl claims + the static test/INVENTORY.jsonl AST scan. No test is executed and no src is run; test/INVENTORY.jsonl is regenerated in-place (idempotently) from that static scan; fetch/@register untouched. Assurance labels are PROVISIONAL: residuals / confidence are not shown yet (RES not wired). Badges reflect the committed test AST, not the latest CI run — a hub can read green while its @test is red between regenerations. @sweep = a graceful regime-resolution gap, not card omission.

Assurance level: corroborated-at-p

Independently corroborated. See the cards below.

`src` claim

method bdg, status exact, reliability high, refs: Gu2010 | Damski2013
χF = Σ{p<q} 4 X{pq}² / (Λp+Λ_q)² from Bogoliubov amplitudes.

Corroboration

regime	mechanism	independence	refs	file
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)
`@sweep`	`second_closed_form`	🟢 structural	χF via ∂h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet	+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)

Test calls

The exact verify(...) call the harness executed for this hub (reconstructed from the test AST):

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 0.5 = 0.5), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(4); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 0.5 = 0.5), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(8); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 0.5 = 0.5), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(12); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 1.0 = 1.0), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(4); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 1.0 = 1.0), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(8); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 1.0 = 1.0), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(12); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 2.0 = 2.0), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(4); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 2.0 = 2.0), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(8); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

verify(TFIM(; J = 0.0, 2.0 = 2.0), FidelitySusceptibility(), OBC(12); route = :second_closed_form, independent = 0.0, agree_within = 1.0e-12, refs = ["χ_F via ∂_h (transverse field derivative): at J=0 the GS is the trivial paramagnet |+⟩^N independent of h, so ⟨ψ(h)|ψ(h+dh)⟩ = 1 ⇒ χ_F(∂_h) = 0 exactly. (∂_J derivative would be non-zero — convention here is ∂_h.)"])

Assurance (provisional)

level: corroborated-at-p 🟢
cards: 9 · model ED-feasible
RES not wired — measured residuals / confidence are not shown yet.

← Model: TFIM · Quantity: FidelitySusceptibility · Atlas index

🟢 TFIM/FidelitySusceptibility/OBC

src claim

Corroboration

Test calls

Assurance (provisional)

🟢 `TFIM/FidelitySusceptibility/OBC`

`src` claim