MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2353450210 · doi:10.1103/physreva.84.022307

Optimal control methods for rapidly time-varying Hamiltonians

2011· article· en· W2353450210 on OpenAlex
Felix Motzoi, Jay Gambetta, Seth Merkel, Frank K. Wilhelm

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 A · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHamiltonian (control theory)Optimal controlVariation (astronomy)Dimension (graph theory)QuantumStatistical physicsPhysicsMathematicsControl (management)Applied mathematicsControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we develop a numerical method to find optimal control pulses that accounts for the separation of timescales between the variation of the input control fields and the applied Hamiltonian. In traditional numerical optimization methods, these timescales are treated as being the same. While this approximation has had much success, in applications where the input controls are filtered substantially or mixed with a fast carrier, the resulting optimized pulses have little relation to the applied physical fields. Our technique remains numerically efficient in that the dimension of our search space is only dependent on the variation of the input control fields, while our simulation of the quantum evolution is accurate on the timescale of the fast variation in the applied Hamiltonian.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.313 · 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