MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306925060 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-33928-z

Flexible learning of quantum states with generative query neural networks

2022· article· en· W4306925060 on OpenAlexafffund
Yan Zhu, Yadong Wu, Ge Bai, Dongsheng Wang, Yuexuan Wang, Giulio Chiribella

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersGovernment of CanadaCroucher FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceQuantum stateArtificial neural networkQuantumSet (abstract data type)Generative modelCluster analysisRepresentation (politics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningTheoretical computer sciencePhysicsGenerative grammarQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep neural networks are a powerful tool for characterizing quantum states. Existing networks are typically trained with experimental data gathered from the quantum state that needs to be characterized. But is it possible to train a neural network offline, on a different set of states? Here we introduce a network that can be trained with classically simulated data from a fiducial set of states and measurements, and can later be used to characterize quantum states that share structural similarities with the fiducial states. With little guidance of quantum physics, the network builds its own data-driven representation of a quantum state, and then uses it to predict the outcome statistics of quantum measurements that have not been performed yet. The state representations produced by the network can also be used for tasks beyond the prediction of outcome statistics, including clustering of quantum states and identification of different phases of matter.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207