MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Robust Characterization of Loss Rates

2015· article· en· W2263382461 on OpenAlexafffund
Joel J. Wallman, Marie Barnhill, Joseph Emerson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeIndustry CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsComputer scienceQubitScalabilityMarkov processData lossAlgorithmStatistical physicsQuantumStatisticsPhysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many physical implementations of qubits-including ion traps, optical lattices and linear optics-suffer from loss. A nonzero probability of irretrievably losing a qubit can be a substantial obstacle to fault-tolerant methods of processing quantum information, requiring new techniques to safeguard against loss that introduce an additional overhead that depends upon the loss rate. Here we present a scalable and platform-independent protocol for estimating the average loss rate (averaged over all input states) resulting from an arbitrary Markovian noise process, as well as an independent estimate of detector efficiency. Moreover, we show that our protocol gives an additional constraint on estimated parameters from randomized benchmarking that improves the reliability of the estimated error rate and provides a new indicator for non-Markovian signatures in the experimental data. We also derive a bound for the state-dependent loss rate in terms of the average loss rate.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207