A QUBO model of the RNA folding problem optimized by variational hybrid quantum annealing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNAs self-interact through hydrogen-bond base-pairing between nucleotides and fold into specific, stable structures that substantially govern their biochemical behaviour. Experimental characterization of these structures remains difficult, hence the desire to predict them computationally from sequence information. However, correctly predicting even the base pairs involved in the folded structure of an RNA, known as secondary structure, from its sequence using minimum free energy models is understood to be NP-hard. Classical approaches rely on heuristics or avoid considering pseudoknots in order to render this problem more tractable, with the cost of inexactness or excluding an entire class of important RNA structures. Given their prospective and demonstrable advantages in certain domains, including combinatorial optimization, quantum computing approaches by contrast have the potential to compute the full RNA folding problem while remaining more feasible and exact. Herein, we present a physically-motivated QUBO model of the RNA folding problem amenable to both quantum annealers and circuit-model quantum computers and compare the performance of this formulation versus current RNA folding QUBOs after tuning the parameters of all against known RNA structures using an approach we call "variational hybrid quantum annealing".
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".