MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220844009 · doi:10.1117/1.ap.4.2.026004

Optical neural network quantum state tomography

2022· article· en· W4220844009 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Photonics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQubitQuantum tomographyQuantum stateArtificial neural networkQuantumPhotonicsQuantum opticsQuantum informationComputer scienceQuantum technologyRealization (probability)Quantum computerQuantum networkQuantum imagingPhysicsArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanicsOpen quantum systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum state tomography (QST) is a crucial ingredient for almost all aspects of experimental quantum information processing. As an analog of the “imaging” technique in quantum settings, QST is born to be a data science problem, where machine learning techniques, noticeably neural networks, have been applied extensively. We build and demonstrate an optical neural network (ONN) for photonic polarization qubit QST. The ONN is equipped with built-in optical nonlinear activation functions based on electromagnetically induced transparency. The experimental results show that our ONN can determine the phase parameter of the qubit state accurately. As optics are highly desired for quantum interconnections, our ONN-QST may contribute to the realization of optical quantum networks and inspire the ideas combining artificial optical intelligence with quantum information studies.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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