MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantum algorithms for generator coordinate methods

2023· article· en· W4382395854 on OpenAlexaff
Muqing Zheng, Bo Peng, Nathan Wiebe, Ang Li, Xiu Yang, Karol Kowalski

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersPacific Northwest National LaboratoryBasic Energy SciencesDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyBattelleU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of ScienceAdvanced Research Projects AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuantum algorithmQuantumFormalism (music)Linear subspaceAlgorithmDiscretizationEigenvalues and eigenvectorsEigenfunctionBenchmark (surveying)QubitQuantum computerAlgebra over a fieldMathematicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses quantum algorithms for the generator coordinate method (GCM) that can be used to benchmark molecular systems. The GCM formalism defined by exponential operators with exponents defined through generators of the fermionic $U(N)$ Lie algebra (Thouless theorem) offers a possibility of probing large subspaces using low-depth quantum circuits. In the present study, we illustrate the performance of the quantum algorithm for constructing a discretized form of the Hill-Wheeler equation for ground- and excited-state energies. We also generalize the standard GCM formulation to multiproduct extension that when collective paths are properly probed can systematically introduce higher rank effects and provide elementary mechanisms for symmetry purification when generator states break the spatial or spin symmetries. The GCM quantum algorithms also can be viewed as an alternative to existing variational quantum eigensolvers, where multistep classical optimization algorithms are replaced by a single-step procedure for solving the Hill-Wheeler eigenvalue problem.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ResearchSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207