MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400582834 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2023.00314

Improving the Efficiency of Payments Systems Using Quantum Computing

2024· article· en· W4400582834 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher McMahon, Donald McGillivray, Ajit Desai, Francisco Rivadeneyra, Jean-Paul Lam, Thomas Lo, Danica Marsden, Vladimir Skavysh

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaymentComputer scienceQuantum computerQuantumPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-value payment systems (HVPSs) are typically liquidity intensive because payments are settled on a gross basis. State-of-the-art solutions to this problem include algorithms that seek netting sets and allow for ad hoc reordering of submitted payments. This paper introduces a new algorithm that explores the entire space of payments reordering to improve the liquidity efficiency of these systems without significantly increasing payment delays. Finding the optimal payment order among the entire space of reorderings is, however, an NP-hard combinatorial optimization problem. We solve this problem using a hybrid quantum annealing algorithm. Despite the limitations in size and speed of today’s quantum computers, our algorithm provides quantifiable liquidity savings when applied to the Canadian HVPS using a 30-day sample of transaction data. By reordering batches of 70 payments, we achieve an average of Canadian (C) $240 million in daily liquidity savings, with a settlement delay of approximately 90 seconds. For a few days in the sample, the liquidity savings exceed C$1 billion. Compared with classical computing and with current algorithms in HVPS, our quantum algorithm offers larger liquidity savings, and it offers more reliable and consistent solutions, particularly under time constraints. This paper was accepted by Chung Piaw Teo, optimization. Supplemental Material: The data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.00314 .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement ScienceSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207