MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529146392 · doi:10.22331/q-2017-04-25-5

QInfer: Statistical inference software for quantum applications

2017· article· en· W2529146392 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Granade, Christopher Ferrie, Ian Hincks, Steven Casagrande, Thomas Alexander, Jonathan A. Gross, Michal Kononenko, Yuval R. Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeAustralian Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffice of Naval ResearchIndustry CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmarkingStatistical inferenceRobustness (evolution)SoftwareInferenceStatistical hypothesis testingData miningTheoretical computer scienceData scienceComputer engineeringMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterizing quantum systems through experimental data is critical to applications as diverse as metrology and quantum computing. Analyzing this experimental data in a robust and reproducible manner is made challenging, however, by the lack of readily-available software for performing principled statistical analysis. We improve the robustness and reproducibility of characterization by introducing an open-source library, QInfer, to address this need. Our library makes it easy to analyze data from tomography, randomized benchmarking, and Hamiltonian learning experiments either in post-processing, or online as data is acquired. QInfer also provides functionality for predicting the performance of proposed experimental protocols from simulated runs. By delivering easy-to-use characterization tools based on principled statistical analysis, QInfer helps address many outstanding challenges facing quantum technology.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.014

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations43
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantumSame topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207