MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1848847180 · doi:10.1103/physrevx.5.031026

Seeking Quantum Speedup Through Spin Glasses: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

2015· article· en· W1848847180 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review X · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsD-Wave Systems (Canada)
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchNIH Office of the DirectorIntelligence Advanced Research Projects ActivityCity University of New YorkEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichNational Science FoundationOffice of the Director of National IntelligenceUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsQuantum annealingSpeedupSimulated annealingQuantum computerQuantumSpin (aerodynamics)Annealing (glass)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While manufacturing limitations are imposing constraints on Moore's law, researchers are searching for novel computing architectures based on quantum-mechanical effects. However, it remains to be shown that quantum annealing techniques consistently outperform classical simulated annealing to minimize optimization problems.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations87
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review XSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207