MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947622185 · doi:10.1103/physreva.101.032314

Measuring the similarity of graphs with a Gaussian boson sampler

2020· article· en· W2947622185 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Schuld, Kamil Brádler, Robert J. Israel, Daiqin Su, Brajesh Gupt

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsXanadu Quantum Technologies (Canada)
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSimilarity (geometry)BosonGaussianStatistical physicsMathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsParticle physicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaussian boson samplers (GBSs) have initially been proposed as a near-term demonstration of classically intractable quantum computation. We show here that they have a potential practical application: Samples from these devices can be used to construct a feature vector that embeds a graph in Euclidean space, where similarity measures between graphs---so-called graph kernels---can be naturally defined. This is crucial for machine learning with graph-structured data, and we show that the GBS-induced kernel performs remarkably well in classification benchmark tasks. We provide a theoretical motivation for this success, linking the extracted features to the number of $r$ matchings in subgraphs. Our results contribute to a new way of thinking about kernels as a quantum hardware-efficient feature mapping, and lead to a promising application for near-term quantum computing.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations93
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207