Using Gaussian Boson Sampling to Find Dense Subgraphs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Boson sampling devices are a prime candidate for exhibiting quantum supremacy, yet their application for solving problems of practical interest is less well understood. Here we show that Gaussian boson sampling (GBS) can be used for dense subgraph identification. Focusing on the NP-hard densest k-subgraph problem, we find that stochastic algorithms are enhanced through GBS, which selects dense subgraphs with high probability. These findings rely on a link between graph density and the number of perfect matchings-enumerated by the Hafnian-which is the relevant quantity determining sampling probabilities in GBS. We test our findings by constructing GBS-enhanced versions of the random search and simulated annealing algorithms and apply them through numerical simulations of GBS to identify the densest subgraph of a 30 vertex graph.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it