MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Glassy Phase of Optimal Quantum Control

2019· article· en· W2794731980 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexandre G. R. Day, Marin Bukov, Phillip Weinberg, Pankaj Mehta, Dries Sels

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAdvanced Scientific Computing ResearchH2020 European Research CouncilOffice of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVlaamse regeringFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekU.S. Department of EnergyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationSimons FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSpin glassStatistical physicsSatisfiabilityQuantumEmbeddingIsing modelPhase transitionComputer scienceSymmetry breakingSpin (aerodynamics)Quantum phase transitionPhysicsAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of preparing a quantum many-body system from an initial to a target state by optimizing the fidelity over the family of bang-bang protocols. We present compelling numerical evidence for a universal spin-glasslike transition controlled by the protocol time duration. The glassy critical point is marked by a proliferation of protocols with close-to-optimal fidelity and with a true optimum that appears exponentially difficult to locate. Using a machine learning (ML) inspired framework based on the manifold learning algorithm t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding, we are able to visualize the geometry of the high-dimensional control landscape in an effective low-dimensional representation. Across the transition, the control landscape features an exponential number of clusters separated by extensive barriers, which bears a strong resemblance with replica symmetry breaking in spin glasses and random satisfiability problems. We further show that the quantum control landscape maps onto a disorder-free classical Ising model with frustrated nonlocal, multibody interactions. Our work highlights an intricate but unexpected connection between optimal quantum control and spin glass physics, and shows how tools from ML can be used to visualize and understand glassy optimization landscapes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations69
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207