MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588168239

Quantum algorithm for identifying hidden polynomial function graphs

2008· article· en· W2588168239 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Thomas Decker, Jan Draisma, Paweł Wocjan

Bibliographic record

VenueCentrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI), the national research institute for mathematics and computer science in the Netherlands · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArmy Research OfficeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsCosetCombinatoricsPolynomialDiscrete mathematicsDegree (music)Constant (computer programming)GeneralizationQuantum algorithmFinite fieldQuantumComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce the Hidden Polynomial Function Graph Problem as a natural generalization of an abelian Hidden Subgroup Problem (HSP) where the subgroups and their cosets correspond to graphs of linear functions over a finite field F with d elements. For the Hidden Polynomial Function Graph Problem the functions are not restricted to be linear but can also be m-variate polynomial functions of total degree n ≥ 2. For fixed m and bounded n the problem is hard on a classical computer as the black box query complexity is polynomial in d. In contrast, we reduce it to a quantum state identification problem so that its query complexity is n m +n m−1 +...+n, independent of d. We derive an efficient measurement for distinguishing the resulting quantum states provided that the characteristic of F is sufficiently large. Its success probability and implementation are closely related to a classical problem involving polynomial equations.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCentrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI), the national research institute for mathematics and computer science in the NetherlandsSame topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207