MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Randomized benchmarking with confidence

2014· article· en· W2019630194 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

VenueNew Journal of Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeAustralian Research CouncilIntelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity
KeywordsBenchmarkingPhysicsNoise (video)AlgorithmStatistical physicsVariance (accounting)Computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randomized benchmarking is a promising tool for characterizing the noise in experimental implementations of quantum systems. In this paper, we prove that the estimates produced by randomized benchmarking (both standard and interleaved) for arbitrary Markovian noise sources are remarkably precise by showing that the variance due to sampling random gate sequences is small. We discuss how to choose experimental parameters, in particular the number and lengths of random sequences, in order to characterize average gate errors with rigorous confidence bounds. We also show that randomized benchmarking can be used to reliably characterize time-dependent Markovian noise (e.g., when noise is due to a magnetic field with fluctuating strength). Moreover, we identify a necessary property for time-dependent noise that is violated by some sources of non-Markovian noise, which provides a test for non-Markovianity.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.216 · 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