MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1605022101 · doi:10.26421/qic14.1-2-4

Quantum algorithms for one-dimensional infrastructures

2014· article· en· W1605022101 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pradeep Kiran Sarvepalli, Paweł Wocjan

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum Information and Computation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAnalytic Number Theory Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuartic functionQuantum computerQuantum algorithmQuadratic equationDiscrete logarithmLogarithmSpeedupFinite fieldTime complexityAlgorithmPolynomialRank (graph theory)MathematicsComputer scienceField (mathematics)Function (biology)Discrete mathematicsQuantumPure mathematicsCombinatoricsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infrastructures are group-like objects that make their appearance in arithmetic geometry in the study of computational problems related to number fields and function fields over finite fields. The most prominent computational tasks of infrastructures are the computation of the circumference of the infrastructure and the generalized discrete logarithms. Both these problems are not known to have efficient classical algorithms for an arbitrary infrastructure. Our main contributions are polynomial time quantum algorithms for one-dimensional infrastructures that satisfy certain conditions. For instance, these conditions are always fulfilled for infrastructures obtained from number fields and function fields, both of unit rank one. Since quadratic number fields give rise to such infrastructures, this algorithm can be used to solve Pell's equation and the principal ideal problem. In this sense we generalize Hallgren's quantum algorithms for quadratic number fields, while also providing a polynomial speedup over them. Our more general approach shows that these quantum algorithms can also be applied to infrastructures obtained from complex cubic and totally complex quartic number fields. Our improved way of analyzing the performance makes it possible to show that these algorithms succeed with constant probability independent of the problem size. In contrast, the lower bound on the success probability due to Hallgren decreases as the fourth power of the logarithm of the circumference. Our analysis also shows that fewer qubits are required. We also contribute to the study of infrastructures, and show how to compute efficiently within infrastructures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantum Information and ComputationSame topicAnalytic Number Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207