MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2931651605 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.100.094434

Making trotters sprint: A variational imaginary time ansatz for quantum many-body systems

2019· article· en· W2931651605 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew J. S. Beach, Roger G. Melko, Tarun Grover, Timothy H. Hsieh

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAnsatzScalingImaginary timeStatistical physicsIsing modelQuantumQuantum entanglementPhysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsQuantum dynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a variational wave function for many-body ground states that involves imaginary-time evolution with two different Hamiltonians in an alternating fashion with variable time intervals. We successfully apply the ansatz on the one- and two-dimensional transverse-field Ising model and systematically study its scaling for the one-dimensional model at criticality. We find the total imaginary time required scales logarithmically with system size, in contrast to the linear scaling in conventional quantum Monte Carlo. We suggest this is due to unique dynamics permitted by alternating imaginary-time evolution, including exponential growth of bipartite entanglement. For generic models, the superior scaling of our ansatz potentially mitigates the negative sign problem at the expense of having to optimize variational parameters.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207