{
  "title": "Entanglement Wedges and Holographic Quantum Error Correction: validity and failure map",
  "chapter": "Entanglement Wedges and Holographic Quantum Error Correction",
  "kind": "validity-failure",
  "schematic": true,
  "not_to_scale": true,
  "stages": [
    "code subspace and algebras",
    "encoding and recovery maps",
    "wedge and area-center data",
    "error norm and finite-N test",
    "qualified QEC claim"
  ],
  "claims": [
    {
      "object": "toy tensor code",
      "required_declaration": "finite Hilbert spaces and exact isometry",
      "diagnostic": "erasure-recovery identity",
      "licensed_conclusion": "exact logical recovery in the model",
      "unsupported_promotion": "a theorem about gravity"
    },
    {
      "object": "semiclassical wedge",
      "required_declaration": "code subspace, center, and area term",
      "diagnostic": "relative entropy and complementary recovery",
      "licensed_conclusion": "leading-order algebraic reconstruction",
      "unsupported_promotion": "exact finite-N isometry"
    },
    {
      "object": "finite-N recovery",
      "required_declaration": "operator class and error norm",
      "diagnostic": "optimal recovery and complement test",
      "licensed_conclusion": "an explicit approximate statement",
      "unsupported_promotion": "consensus on a shared logical algebra"
    }
  ],
  "takeaway": "Exact toy-code recovery, leading semiclassical wedge reconstruction, and finite-N holographic QEC are different statements with different algebras and errors."
}