MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108564656 · doi:10.1109/qce49297.2020.00047

Quantum Computing for High-School Students An Experience Report

2020· article· en· W3108564656 on OpenAlexaff
Prashanti Priya Angara, Ulrike Stege, Andrew MacLean

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuantum computerQuantumMathematics educationMultimediaPsychologyPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum computing is an emerging field that can revolutionize our ability to solve problems and enable breakthroughs in many areas including optimization, machine learning, chemistry, and drug design. With the increasing computational power of quantum computers and the proliferation of quantum development kits, the demand for a skilled workforce in quantum computing increases significantly. The theory of quantum computing lies at the crossroads of quantum physics, mathematics, and computer science. The field of quantum computing has matured and can now be explored by all students. While today, quantum computers and simulators are readily accessible and programmable over the internet, quantum computing education is just ramping up. This paper describes our experiences in organizing and delivering quantum computing workshops for high-school students with little or no experience in the abovementioned fields. We introduce students to the world of quantum computing in innovative ways, such as newly designed “unplugged” activities for teaching basic quantum computing concepts. Overall, we take a programmatic approach and introduce students to the IBM Q Experience using Qiskit and Jupyter notebooks. Our experiences and findings suggest that basic quantum computing concepts are palatable for high-school students, and-due to significant differences between classical and quantum computing-early exposure to quantum computing is a valuable addition to the set of problem-solving and computing skills that high-schoolers obtain before entering university.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.008

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations31
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207