MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantum Error Correction Decoheres Noise

2018· article· en· W2804898954 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIntelligence Advanced Research Projects ActivityIndustry CanadaCanada First Research Excellence FundGovernment of OntarioGovernment of CanadaOffice of the Director of National IntelligenceCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsFidelityQuantum error correctionPauli exclusion principleProbabilistic logicNoise (video)Computer scienceError detection and correctionAlgorithmQuantumEncoding (memory)Quantum noiseQuantum computerPhysicsQuantum mechanicsTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Typical studies of quantum error correction assume probabilistic Pauli noise, largely because it is relatively easy to analyze and simulate. Consequently, the effective logical noise due to physically realistic coherent errors is relatively unknown. Here, we prove that encoding a system in a stabilizer code and measuring error syndromes decoheres errors, that is, causes coherent errors to converge toward probabilistic Pauli errors, even when no recovery operations are applied. Two practical consequences are that the error rate in a logical circuit is well quantified by the average gate fidelity at the logical level and that essentially optimal recovery operators can be determined by independently optimizing the logical fidelity of the effective noise per syndrome.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.275 · 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