MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513299842 · doi:10.1088/1751-8113/49/8/085301

Quantum conical designs

2016· article· en· W2513299842 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew A. Graydon, D. M. Appleby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicgraph theory and CDMA systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPolytopeCombinatoricsSimplexMathematicsRank (graph theory)Conical surfaceQuantum entanglementDiscrete mathematicsQuantumGeometryQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complex projective t -designs, particularly sic s and full sets of mutually unbiased bases, play an important role in quantum information. We introduce a generalization which we call conical t -designs. They include arbitrary rank symmetric informationally complete measurements ( sim s) and full sets of arbitrary rank mutually unbiased measurements ( mum s). They are deeply implicated in the description of entanglement (as we show in a subsequent paper). Viewed in one way a conical two-design is a symmetric decomposition of a separable Werner state (up to a normalization factor). Viewed in another way it is a certain kind of polytope in the Bloch body. In the Bloch body picture sim s and full sets of mum s form highly symmetric polytopes (a single regular simplex in the one case; the convex hull of a set of orthogonal regular simplices in the other). We give the necessary and sufficient conditions for an arbitrary polytope to be what we call a homogeneous conical two-design. This suggests a way to search for new kinds of projective two-design.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicgraph theory and CDMA systemsFrench-language works237,207