Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The quantum-to-classical transition is often operationally identified through one preferred indicator, such as coherence loss, classical record formation or measurement stability. This paper develops a different reconstruction test: classicality is treated as a witness-indexed, observer-explicit and recoverability-sensitive cross-scale transition rather than as a single hard boundary inserted by assumption. Starting from a fine description X, a candidate effective state Γ and a future observable family Y, we define a predictive-retention ratio η_pred=I(Γ;Y)/I(X;Y) and residual ε_cl=I(X;Y|Γ). We distinguish raw relation count from record-forming capacity K_rec^(δ), introduce relation-to-record efficiency κ_R, define a transition spectrum T_C={t_W} across a declared witness family and its width ΔT_C=max_W t_W−min_W t_W, and require observer counterfactuals so that conditioning or readout cannot manufacture a physical transition. An observer-conditioned recoverability diagnostic separates information destroyed, information dispersed into wider system–environment relations and information inaccessible to a restricted observer. The resulting classicality vector is deliberately non-compensatory unless a physical model proves otherwise. The construction is a falsifiable physical-regression architecture, not a derivation of quantum mechanics from Ω₀/A2, and it makes explicit the calculations and counterexamples required before any stronger claim is admissible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yanghua Wang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: