MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Most Quantum States Are Too Entangled To Be Useful As Computational Resources

2009· article· en· W2005144372 on OpenAlexaff
Steven T. Flammia, Jens Eisert

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum entanglementSpeedupQuantum computerCluster stateQuantum mechanicsQuantumQuantum algorithmQubitComputationPhysicsQuantum teleportationQuantum stateComputer scienceQuantum networkAlgorithmParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is often argued that entanglement is at the root of the speedup for quantum compared to classical computation, and that one needs a sufficient amount of entanglement for this speedup to be manifest. In measurement-based quantum computing, the need for a highly entangled initial state is particularly obvious. Defying this intuition, we show that quantum states can be too entangled to be useful for the purpose of computation, in that high values of the geometric measure of entanglement preclude states from offering a universal quantum computational speedup. We prove that this phenomenon occurs for a dramatic majority of all states: the fraction of useful n-qubit pure states is less than exp(-n;{2}). This work highlights a new aspect of the role entanglement plays for quantum computational speedups.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations291
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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