MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102596210

Braiding Operators are Universal Quantum Gates

2004· article· en· W3102596210 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Air ForceUniversity of WaterlooDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyAir Force Materiel CommandInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueAir Force Research LaboratoryNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsQuantum networkQuantum entanglementQuantum gateQuantum algorithmQuantum computerTheoretical physicsUnitary stateQuantum mechanicsQuantum teleportationTopology (electrical circuits)QuantumMathematicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is an exploration of the role of unitary braiding operators in quantum computing. We show that a single specific solution, R, of the Yang-Baxter Equation is a universal gate for quantum computing, in the presence of local unitary transformations. We show that this same R generates a new non-trivial invariant of braids, knots, and links. The paper discusses these results in the context of comparing quantum and topological points of view. In particular, we discuss quantum computation of link invariants, the relationship between quantum entanglement and topological entanglement, and the structure of braiding in a topological quantum field 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.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations201
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207