MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Truncated quantum channel representations for coupled harmonic oscillators

2013· article· en· W1972168844 on OpenAlexaff
Yingkai Ouyang, Wee Hao Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonic oscillatorQuantumPhysicsQuantum harmonic oscillatorDimension (graph theory)Quantum mechanicsTruncation (statistics)Quantum error correctionAmplitudeQuantum systemMathematicsStatistical physicsQubitPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coupled quantum harmonic oscillators, studied by many authors using many different techniques over the decades, are frequently used toy models to study open quantum systems. In this paper, we explicitly study the simplest oscillator model—a pair of initially decoupled quantum harmonic oscillators interacting with a spring-like coupling, where the bath oscillator is initially in a thermal-like state. In particular, we treat the completely positive and trace-preserving map on the system as a quantum channel and study the truncation of the channel by truncating its Kraus set and its output dimension. We thereby derive the truncated transition amplitudes of the corresponding truncated channel. Finally, we give a computable approximation for these truncated transition amplitudes with explicit error bounds and perform a case study of the oscillators in the off-resonant and weakly coupled regime numerically. We demonstrate explicitly that the substantial leakage error can be mitigated via quantum error correction.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207