MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903221501 · doi:10.1103/physreva.99.032331

Evaluating analytic gradients on quantum hardware

2019· article· en· W2903221501 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Schuld, Ville Bergholm, Christian Gogolin, Josh Izaac, Nathan Killoran

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsXanadu Quantum Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum computerComputer scienceQuantum circuitQuantumComputationQubitElectronic circuitQuantum algorithmQuantum gateFunction (biology)AlgorithmQuantum error correctionTheoretical computer scienceComputer engineeringTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An important application for near-term quantum computing lies in optimization tasks, with applications ranging from quantum chemistry and drug discovery to machine learning. In many settings, most prominently in so-called parametrized or variational algorithms, the objective function is a result of hybrid quantum-classical processing. To optimize the objective, it is useful to have access to exact gradients of quantum circuits with respect to gate parameters. This paper shows how gradients of expectation values of quantum measurements can be estimated using the same, or almost the same, architecture that executes the original circuit. It generalizes previous results for qubit-based platforms, and proposes recipes for the computation of gradients of continuous-variable circuits. Interestingly, in many important instances it is sufficient to run the original quantum circuit twice while shifting a single gate parameter to obtain the corresponding component of the gradient. More general cases can be solved by conditioning a single gate on an ancilla.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1,053
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207