MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396721832 · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.020330

High-Order Randomized Compiler for Hamiltonian Simulation

2024· article· en· W4396721832 on OpenAlexafffund
Kouhei Nakaji, Mohsen Bagherimehrab, Alán Aspuru‐Guzik

Bibliographic record

VenuePRX Quantum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsHamiltonian (control theory)InverseMathematicsQuantumLattice (music)AlgorithmApplied mathematicsUpper and lower boundsQubitComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical optimizationPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hamiltonian simulation is known to be one of the fundamental building blocks of a variety of quantum algorithms such as its most immediate application, that of simulating many-body systems to extract their physical properties. In this work, we present qSWIFT, a high-order randomized algorithm for Hamiltonian simulation. In qSWIFT, the required number of gates for a given precision is independent of the number of terms in the Hamiltonian, while the systematic error is exponentially reduced with regard to the order parameter. In this respect, our qSWIFT is a higher-order counterpart of the previously proposed quantum stochastic drift protocol (qDRIFT), the number of gates in which scales linearly with the inverse of the precision required. We construct the qSWIFT channel and establish a rigorous bound for the systematic error quantified by the diamond norm. qSWIFT provides an algorithm to estimate given physical quantities by using a system with one ancilla qubit, which is as simple as other product-formula-based approaches such as regular Trotter-Suzuki decompositions and qDRIFT. Our numerical experiment reveals that the required number of gates in qSWIFT is significantly reduced compared to qDRIFT. In particular, the advantage is significant for problems where high precision is required; e.g., to achieve a systematic relative propagation error of 10−6 , the required number of gates in third-order qSWIFT is 1000 times smaller than that of qDRIFT. 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations22
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRX QuantumSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207