QuOCS: The Quantum Optimal Control Suite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantum optimal control includes the family of pulse-shaping algorithms that aim to unlock the full potential of a variety of quantum technologies. Our Quantum Optimal Control Suite (QuOCS) unites experimental focus and model-based approaches in a unified framework. The easy usage and installation of QuOCS and the availability of various combinable optimization strategies is designed to improve the performance of many quantum technology platforms, such as color defects in diamond, superconducting qubits, atom- or ion-based quantum computers. It can also be applied to the study of more general phenomena in physics. In this paper, we describe the software and the main toolbox of gradient-free and gradient-based algorithms. We then show how the user can connect it to their experiment. In addition, we provide illustrative examples where our optimization suite solves typical quantum optimal control problems, in both open- and closed-loop settings. Integration into existing experimental control software is already provided for the experiment control software Qudi [J. M. Binder et al., SoftwareX, 6, 85-90, (2017)], and further extensions are investigated and highly encouraged. QuOCS is available from GitHub, under Apache License 2.0, and can be found on the PyPI repository.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".