{
  "annotation_id": "c6bef339-f244-47d4-93e7-00d9876cf7be",
  "date_created": "2026-03-02T18:02:02.532000Z",
  "date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:02:02.532000Z",
  "file_hash": "186ff82cbc57668708c8dea15e9e15a1dd0b0bf8b2723c228481d7cf95c02d6d",
  "private": false,
  "record": {
    "abstract": "The Everett-interpretation description of isolated measurements, i.e.,\nmeasurements involving interaction between a measuring apparatus and a measured\nsystem but not interaction with the environment, is shown to be unambiguous,\nclaims in the literature to the contrary notwithstanding. The appearance of\nambiguity in such measurements is engendered by the fact that, in the\nSchroedinger picture, information on splitting into Everett copies must be\ninferred from the history of the combined system. In the Heisenberg picture\nthis information is contained in mathematical quantities associated with a\nsingle time.",
    "arxiv_id": "quant-ph/0310186",
    "authors": [
      "Mark A. Rubin"
    ],
    "categories": [
      "quant-ph"
    ],
    "doi": "10.1023/B:FOPL.0000035668.37005.e0",
    "journal_ref": "Found. Phys. Lett. 17 (2004) 323-341",
    "title": "There Is No Basis Ambiguity in Everett Quantum Mechanics",
    "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0310186"
  },
  "schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
  "source": {
    "execution_id": "011e478b-9951-4f8b-bab3-9f56d1b8e782",
    "id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
    "type": "Model",
    "variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
    "version": "0.1.0"
  },
  "user_id": 1000002
}