Optimal Universal Learning Machines for Quantum State Discrimination
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
We consider the problem of correctly classifying a given quantum two-level system (qubit) which is known to be in one of two equally probable quantum states. We assume that this task should be performed by a quantum machine which does not have at its disposal a complete classical description of the two template states, but can only have partial prior information about their level of purity and mutual overlap. Moreover, similarly to the classical supervised learning paradigm, we assume that the machine can be trained by n qubits prepared in the first template state and by n more qubits prepared in the second template state. In this situation, we are interested in the optimal process which correctly classifies the input qubit with the largest probability allowed by quantum mechanics. The problem is studied in its full generality for a number of different prior information scenarios and for an arbitrary size n of the training data. Finite size corrections around the asymptotic limit n → ∞ are derived. When the states are assumed to be pure, with known overlap, the problem is also solved in the case of d-level systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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