MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantum Algorithm for Data Fitting

2012· article· en· W1981783889 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuantum phase estimation algorithmQuantum algorithmAlgorithmComputer scienceQuantumFunction (biology)Quantum computerQuantum algorithm for linear systems of equationsQuantum stateQuantum error correctionQuantum processPhysicsQuantum mechanicsQuantum dynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide a new quantum algorithm that efficiently determines the quality of a least-squares fit over an exponentially large data set by building upon an algorithm for solving systems of linear equations efficiently [Harrow et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 150502 (2009)]. In many cases, our algorithm can also efficiently find a concise function that approximates the data to be fitted and bound the approximation error. In cases where the input data are pure quantum states, the algorithm can be used to provide an efficient parametric estimation of the quantum state and therefore can be applied as an alternative to full quantum-state tomography given a fault tolerant quantum computer.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.282 · 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