MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216453180 · doi:10.1109/qce52317.2021.00042

A Quantum Computing Programming Language for Transparent Experiment Descriptions

2021· article· en· W3216453180 on OpenAlexaff
Virginia Frey, Richard Rademacher, Elijah Durso-Sabina, Noah Greenberg, Nikolay Videnov, Matthew Day, Rajibul Islam, Crystal Senko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCompilerProgramming languageQuantum circuitAbstraction layerComputer architectureComputer hardwareQuantumQuantum computerSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new quantum programming language called ‘Qualia’ that enables transparent programming of quantum hardware. Qualia allows seamless integration of abstraction layers such as the digital circuit layer and the analog control pulse waveform layer. Additionally, the language supports user-issued low-level hardware instructions like FPGA actions. Mid-circuit measurements and branching decision logic support real-time, adaptive programs. This flexibility allows users to write code for everything from quantum error correction to analog quantum simulation. The combination of a user-facing calibration database and a powerful symbolic algebra framework provides users with an unprecedented level of expressiveness and transparency. We display the salient characteristics of the language structure and describe how the accompanying compiler can translate programs written in any abstraction layer into precisely timed hardware commands. Qualia provides a fully transparent programming interface that allows simultaneous circuit level and hardware level control. There is no "behind-the-scenes" circuit compilation or hardware calibration. Every command is executed exactly as the the user dictates.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207