Here comes the SU(N): multivariate quantum gates and gradients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variational quantum algorithms use non-convex optimization methods to find the optimal parameters for a parametrized quantum circuit in order to solve a computational problem. The choice of the circuit ansatz, which consists of parameterized gates, is crucial to the success of these algorithms. Here, we propose a gate which fully parameterizes the special unitary group <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">U</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:math>. This gate is generated by a sum of non-commuting operators, and we provide a method for calculating its gradient on quantum hardware. In addition, we provide a theorem for the computational complexity of calculating these gradients by using results from Lie algebra theory. In doing so, we further generalize previous parameter-shift methods. We show that the proposed gate and its optimization satisfy the quantum speed limit, resulting in geodesics on the unitary group. Finally, we give numerical evidence to support the feasibility of our approach and show the advantage of our gate over a standard gate decomposition scheme. In doing so, we show that not only the expressibility of an ansatz matters, but also how it's explicitly parameterized.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".