User:Ks446/Hayden-Preskill thought experiment/Krisch53 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Editing Ks446 on Hayden-Preskill
 * User:Ks446/Hayden-Preskill thought experiment

Lead evaluation
No lead is provided in updates. Since the contents are highly technical, an improved non-technical lead may be quite helpful for readers.

Content evaluation
All content added is relevant to the topic and spans a balanced of range of describing the Hayden-Preskill thought experiment as well as its implications. The information provided is, however, highly technical and could benefit greatly from some fleshing out. In particular, the Toy Model section claims (with citation) that there is a tradeoff between "event horizon smoothness" and "recoverability" but does not go on to detail what this tradeoff is, nor how it arises. Another example of this is the reference to "early" and "late" radiation in the Decoding Fidelity section. The article implies the reader should be familiar with the terms, but they have not yet been defined at that point.

The main area I find stymieing in this article is that at no point has the actual protocol or experiment been well described. There is plenty of discussion of the implications and applicability, but there is no clear description of the actual Hayden-Preskill protocol.

Tone and balance evaluation
Given the technical nature of the topic, the content added is, unsurprisingly, entirely neutral and unbiased.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources appear thorough, current, update, and operational. Most are from peer reviewed journals. A few sources are taken from the arXiv. I have not investigated these in detail, but since the arXiv is not peer reviewed or refereed in any way each such article should be evaluated careful before inclusion.

Organization evaluation
The content is well broken down into clear sections. However, there are quite a few grammatical errors, for example the sentence "Consider for this model coarse grained entropy larger than entanglement entropy is considered." in the Toy Models section. Additionally, as mentioned above, the content added is quite dense and could greatly benefit from fleshing out the ideas as well as some explicit descriptions of the technical jargon.

Images and media evaluation
No media is present in this article.

Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
Overall the content added is a significant improvement over what was present. In particular, actual discussion of the topics relating to the protocol are discussed. There is now more to the article than simply a statement that such a thought experiment exists.

The added content covers a broad range of areas relating to the Hayden-Preskill protocol and does a good job seating the protocol in the broader context of quantum physics.

Fixing grammar and expanding discussions will greatly improve this article.