MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396781429 · doi:10.1038/s41534-024-00844-7

Fourier Quantum Process Tomography

2024· article· en· W4396781429 on OpenAlexafffund
Francesco Di Colandrea, Nazanin Dehghan, Alessio D’Errico, Ebrahim Karimi

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Quantum Information · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Research Council CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTomographyComputer scienceProcess (computing)Fourier transformAlgorithmMathematicsPhysicsOpticsMathematical analysisProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The characterization of a quantum device is a crucial step in the development of quantum experiments. This is accomplished via Quantum Process Tomography, which combines the outcomes of different projective measurements to deliver a possible reconstruction of the underlying process. The tomography is typically performed by processing an overcomplete set of measurements and extracting the process matrix from maximum-likelihood estimation. Here, we introduce Fourier Quantum Process Tomography, a technique which requires a reduced number of measurements, and benchmark its performance against the standard maximum-likelihood approach. Fourier Quantum Process Tomography is based on measuring probability distributions in two conjugate spaces for different state preparations and projections. Exploiting the concept of phase retrieval, our scheme achieves a complete and robust characterization of the setup by processing a near-minimal set of measurements. We experimentally test the technique on different space-dependent polarization transformations, reporting average fidelities higher than 90% and significant computational advantage.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.262 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Quantum InformationSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207