MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280561323 · doi:10.1103/physreva.105.l060802

Gradient-based reconstruction of molecular Hamiltonians and density matrices from time-dependent quantum observables

2022· article· en· W4280561323 on OpenAlexafffund
Wucheng Zhang, Ilia Tutunnikov, Ilya Sh. Averbukh, Roman V. Krems

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIsrael Science Foundation
KeywordsObservableDensity matrixHamiltonian (control theory)Operator (biology)QuantumPhysicsQuantum stateTime evolutionGradient descentStatistical physicsQuantum systemMatrix (chemical analysis)Quantum mechanicsMathematicsChemistryMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a quantum system with a time-independent Hamiltonian parametrized by a set of unknown parameters $\ensuremath{\alpha}$. The system is prepared in a general quantum state by an evolution operator that depends on a set of unknown parameters $P$. After the preparation, the system evolves in time, and it is characterized by a time-dependent observable $\mathcal{O}(t)$. We show that it is possible to obtain closed-form expressions for the gradients of the distance between $\mathcal{O}(t)$ and a calculated observable with respect to $\ensuremath{\alpha}, P$, and all elements of the system density matrix, whether for pure or mixed states. These gradients can be used in projected gradient descent to infer $\ensuremath{\alpha}, P$, and the relevant density matrix from dynamical observables. We combine this approach with random phase wave function approximation to obtain closed-form expressions for gradients that can be used to infer population distributions from averaged time-dependent observables in problems with a large number of quantum states participating in dynamics. The approach is illustrated by determining the temperature of molecular gas (initially, in thermal equilibrium at room temperature) from laser-induced time-dependent molecular alignment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207