Analyzing Prospects for Quantum Advantage in Topological Data Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lloyd [Nat. Commun. , 10138 (2016)] were first to demonstrate the promise of quantum algorithms for computing Betti numbers, a way to characterize topological features of data sets. Here, we propose, analyze, and optimize an improved quantum algorithm for topological data analysis (TDA) with reduced scaling, including a method for preparing Dicke states based on inequality testing, a more efficient amplitude estimation algorithm using Kaiser windows, and an optimal implementation of eigenvalue projectors based on Chebyshev polynomials. We compile our approach to a fault-tolerant gate set and estimate constant factors in the Toffoli complexity. Our analysis reveals that superquadratic quantum speedups are only possible for this problem when targeting a multiplicative error approximation and the Betti number grows asymptotically. Further, we propose a dequantization of the quantum TDA algorithm that shows that having exponentially large dimension and Betti number are necessary, but insufficient conditions, for superpolynomial advantage. We then introduce and analyze specific problem examples which have parameters in the regime where superpolynomial advantages may be achieved, and argue that quantum circuits with tens of billions of Toffoli gates can solve seemingly classically intractable instances. Published by the American Physical Society 2024
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 it