MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2967236160

Control techniques in spin based quantum computation

2019· dissertation· en· W2967236160 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hemant Katiyar

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsQuantum controlQuantum computerComputationQuantumPhysicsSpin (aerodynamics)Computer scienceQuantum mechanicsTheoretical physicsAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Working on quantum systems entail different interests, for example, working on fundamental \nunderstanding of quantum systems also lay foundation for better quantum computation \ntechniques. A test for whether a system is behaving quantum mechanically or \nclassically is devised by Leggett and Garg in form of inequalities, called Leggett-Garg Inequalities \n(LGI). Such Inequalities are violated by a system whose evolution is governed \nby quantum mechanics. A precise experiment to violate LGIs require a guarantee that the \nmeasurement does not affect the system or its future dynamics. These Inequalities were \nproposed for dichotomic systems,systems which can have two outcomes. Here we present \nan LG experiment on a three-level quantum system, which theoretically have larger quantum \nupper bound than that of a two-level quantum system. This larger violation also \nprovides a bigger buffer to taking in account of the various experimental imperfections. \nPerforming a quantum computing task requires precise level of control to initialize, \nperform and measure the quantum system. With increasing size of the quantum processor \nthe challenge is to maintain optimal control. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) has \nalways been a very faithful test-bed for quantum processing ideas. In NMR, we perform \nRadio Frequency (RF) pulses to control and steer the system to the desired state. Most \nused method to derive the exact frequency and amplitude of these pulses for a given \ntask is based on gradient. Although systematic, one have to simulate these pulses on \na classical computer first, which makes the task very inefficient. We report a a way of \nperforming optimization with a hybrid quantum-classical scheme. This scheme helps us \nperform classically harder computational tasks on the quantum processor. We optimize \npulses which drive our system from 7-coherence state to 12-coherence state on a 12-qubit \nNMR processor. \nElectron Spin Resonance (ESR) employs the same techniques as of NMR but having \nadvantage in larger polarization compared to later. Although this does not imply better \ncontrol, cause the frequency at which pulses are required to control an ESR system fall into \nmicrowave region. Microwave frequency are harder to control electronically, thus making \nit harder for performing ESR quantum computing. The hybrid scheme used in NMR \nexperiment relies on some ideal pulses which are needed to be optimized classically. We \nalleviate this requirement by using finite difference method of calculating gradient. We \ncompare these methods with the earlier methods to show the superiority of such a scheme. \nState-to-state transfer pulses are sufficient for most of the quantum computing task, \nbut, an universal quantum information implementation requires state independent pulses. \nThe techniques used in optimizing state-to-state pulses can be modified to optimize for a \nstate independent pulse. We show that this methods scale polynomially with the number \nof qubits and is general in terms of its implementation. We further reduce the resource \nrequirement by using a NMR related implementation.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→Same topicQuantum Information and Cryptography→French-language works237,207→