Machine Learning Corrected Quantum Dynamics Calculations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantum scattering calculations for all but low-dimensional systems at low energies must rely on approximations. All approximations introduce errors. The impact of these errors is often difficult to assess because they depend on the Hamiltonian parameters and the particular observable under study. Here, we illustrate a general, system- and approximation-independent, approach to improve the accuracy of quantum dynamics approximations. The method is based on a Bayesian machine learning (BML) algorithm that is trained by a small number of exact results and a large number of approximate calculations, resulting in ML models that can generalize exact quantum results to different dynamical processes. Thus, a ML model trained by a combination of approximate and rigorous results for a certain inelastic transition can make accurate predictions for different transitions without rigorous calculations. This opens the possibility of improving the accuracy of approximate calculations for quantum transitions that are out of reach of exact scattering theory.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it