Quantum Model Learning Agent: characterisation of quantum systems through machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate models of real quantum systems are important for investigating their behaviour, yet are difficult to distill empirically. Here, we report an algorithm -- the Quantum Model Learning Agent (QMLA) -- to reverse engineer Hamiltonian descriptions of a target system. We test the performance of QMLA on a number of simulated experiments, demonstrating several mechanisms for the design of candidate Hamiltonian models and simultaneously entertaining numerous hypotheses about the nature of the physical interactions governing the system under study. QMLA is shown to identify the true model in the majority of instances, when provided with limited a priori information, and control of the experimental setup. Our protocol can explore Ising, Heisenberg and Hubbard families of models in parallel, reliably identifying the family which best describes the system dynamics. We demonstrate QMLA operating on large model spaces by incorporating a genetic algorithm to formulate new hypothetical models. The selection of models whose features propagate to the next generation is based upon an objective function inspired by the Elo rating scheme, typically used to rate competitors in games such as chess and football. In all instances, our protocol finds models that exhibit $F_1$-score $\geq 0.88$ when compared with the true model, and it precisely identifies the true model in 72% of cases, whilst exploring a space of over $250,000$ potential models. By testing which interactions actually occur in the target system, QMLA is a viable tool for both the exploration of fundamental physics and the characterisation and calibration of quantum devices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".