Dimensional Expressivity Analysis, best-approximation errors, and automated design of parametric quantum circuits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design of parametric quantum circuits (PQCs) for efficient use in variational quantum simulations (VQS) is subject to two competing factors. On one hand, the set of states that can be generated by the PQC has to be large enough to contain the solution state. Otherwise, one may at best find the best approximation of the solution restricted to the states generated by the chosen PQC. On the other hand, the PQC should contain as few parametric quantum gates as possible to minimize noise from the quantum device. Thus, when designing a PQC one needs to ensure that there are no redundant parameters. The dimensional expressivity analysis discussed in these proceedings is a means of addressing these counteracting effects. Its main objective is to identify independent and redundant parameters in the PQC. Using this information, superfluous parameters can be removed and the dimension of the space of states that are generated by the PQC can be computed. Knowing the dimension of the physical state space then allows us to deduce whether or not the PQC can reach all physical states. Furthermore, the dimensional expressivity analysis can be implemented efficiently using a hybrid quantum-classical algorithm. This implementation has relatively small overhead costs both for the classical and quantum part of the algorithm and could therefore be used in the future for on-the-fly circuit construction. This would allow for optimized circuits to be used in every loop of a VQS rather than the same PQC for the entire VQS. These proceedings review and extend work in [1, 2].
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".