Fidelity overhead for non-local measurements in variational quantum algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measuring quantum observables by grouping terms that can be rotated to sums of only products of Pauli $\hat z$ operators (Ising form) is proven to be efficient in near term quantum computing algorithms. This approach requires extra unitary transformations to rotate the state of interest so that the measurement of a fragment's Ising form would be equivalent to measurement of the fragment for the unrotated state. These extra rotations allow one to perform a fewer number of measurements by grouping more terms into the measurable fragments with a lower overall estimator variance. However, previous estimations of the number of measurements did not take into account non-unit fidelity of quantum gates implementing the additional transformations. Through a circuit fidelity reduction, additional transformations introduce extra uncertainty and increase the needed number of measurements. Here we consider a simple model for errors introduced by additional gates needed in schemes involving grouping of commuting Pauli products. For a set of molecular electronic Hamiltonians, we confirm that the numbers of measurements in schemes using non-local qubit rotations are still lower than those in their local qubit rotation counterparts, even after accounting for uncertainties introduced by additional gates.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".