MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198943914 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.104.094106

Interacting Defects Generate Stochastic Fluctuations in Superconducting Qubits

2021· article· en· W3198943914 on OpenAlexafffund
J. H. Béjanin, C. T. Earnest, A. S. Sharafeldin, M. Mariantoni

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsQubitJitterSuperconductivityDominoIdeal (ethics)PhysicsQuantumSuperconducting quantum computingQuantum computerQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceStatistical physicsTheoretical physicsTelecommunicationsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amorphous dielectric materials have been known to host two-level systems (TLSs) for more than four decades. Recent developments on superconducting resonators and qubits enable detailed studies on the physics of TLSs. In particular, measuring the loss of a device over long time periods (a few days) allows us to investigate stochastic fluctuations due to the interaction between TLSs. We measure the energy relaxation time of a frequency-tunable planar superconducting qubit over time and frequency. The experiments show a variety of stochastic patterns that we are able to explain by means of extensive simulations. The model used in our simulations assumes a qubit interacting with high-frequency TLSs, which, in turn, interact with thermally activated low-frequency TLSs. Our simulations match the experiments and suggest the density of low-frequency TLSs is about three orders of magnitude larger than that of high-frequency ones.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207