QBoost: Large Scale Classifier Training with Adiabatic Quantum Optimization.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a novel discrete optimization method for training in the context of a boosting framework for large scale binary classifiers. The motivation is to cast the training problem into the format required by existing adiabatic quantum hardware. First we provide theoretical arguments concerning the transformation of an originally continuous optimization problem into one with discrete variables of low bit depth. Next we propose QBoost as an iterative training algorithm in which a subset of weak classifiers is selected by solving a hard optimization problem in each iteration. A strong classifier is incrementally constructed by concatenating the subsets of weak classifiers. We supplement the findings with experiments on one synthetic and two natural data sets and compare against the performance of existing boosting algorithms. Finally, by conducting a quantum Monte Carlo simulation we gather evidence that adiabatic quantum optimization is able to handle the discrete optimization problems generated by QBoost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it