MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174045614 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2020-0592

A method to improve quantum state fidelity in circuits executed on IBM’s quantum computers

2021· article· en· W3174045614 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mitali Sisodia, Abhishek Shukla, Alexandre A. A. de Almeida, Gerhard W. Dueck, Anirban Pathak

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersUniversidade Estadual PaulistaHebrew University of JerusalemNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsElectronic circuitQuantum computerPhysicsBenchmark (surveying)FidelityIBMQuantumQuantum circuitState (computer science)Limit (mathematics)Reduction (mathematics)Computer engineeringComputer scienceAlgorithmQuantum error correctionQuantum mechanicsMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, various quantum computing and communication tasks have been implemented using IBM’s superconductivity-based quantum computers. Here, we show that the circuits used in most of those works were not optimized and obtain the corresponding optimized circuits. Optimized circuits implementable in IBM quantum computers are also obtained for a set of reversible benchmark circuits. With a clear example, it is shown that the reduction in circuit cost enhances the fidelity of the output state (with respect to the theoretically expected state in the absence of noise) as fewer gates and less circuit depth introduce fewer errors during evolution of the state. Further, considering Mermin inequality as an example, it is shown that the violation of the classical limit is enhanced when we use optimized circuits. Thus, the present approach can be used to identify a relatively weaker signature of quantumness and to establish quantum supremacy in a stronger manner.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207