MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399522253 · doi:10.1145/3618260.3649638

Classical Simulation of Peaked Shallow Quantum Circuits

2024· article· en· W4399522253 on OpenAlexaff
Sergey Bravyi, David Gosset, Yinchen Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQubitPolynomialQuantum computerInverseAlgorithmQuantum circuitElectronic circuitMathematicsScalingObservableExponential functionDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)QuantumCombinatoricsQuantum mechanicsPhysicsQuantum error correctionMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An n-qubit quantum circuit is said to be peaked if it has an output probability that is at least inverse-polynomially large as a function of n. We describe a classical algorithm with quasipolynomial runtime nO(logn) that approximately samples from the output distribution of a peaked constant-depth circuit. We give even faster algorithms for circuits composed of nearest-neighbor gates on a D-dimensional grid of qubits, with polynomial runtime nO(1) if D=2 and almost-polynomial runtime nO(loglogn) for D>2. Our sampling algorithms can be used to estimate output probabilities of shallow circuits to within a given inverse-polynomial additive error, improving previously known methods. As a simple application, we obtain a quasipolynomial algorithm to estimate the magnitude of the expected value of any Pauli observable in the output state of a shallow circuit (which may or may not be peaked). This is a dramatic improvement over the prior state-of-the-art algorithm which had an exponential scaling in √n.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207