MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401548439 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2024.110789

QF-LCA dataset: Quantum Field Lens Coding Algorithm for system state simulation and strong predictions

2024· article· en· W4401548439 on OpenAlexafffund
Philip Baback Alipour, T. Aaron Gulliver

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsCoding (social sciences)AlgorithmComputer scienceLens (geology)Field (mathematics)QuantumThrough-the-lens meteringState (computer science)MathematicsOpticsPhysicsStatisticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum field lens coding algorithm (QF-LCA) dataset is useful for simulating systems and predict system events with high probability. This is achieved by computing QF lens distance-based variables associated to event probabilities from the dataset produced by field lenses that encode system states on a quantum level. The probability of a state transition (ST), doubles in prediction values at the decoding step, e.g., ST probabilities of P ≥ 1 / 3 into P ≥ 2 / 3 based on a single field (SF) transform into a quantum double-field (QDF). This transformation doubles the ST probability space via the field's scalar κ , in a published QDF method article. A QDF, as a double-field computation (DFC) model, simulates thermodynamic systems in predicting events by producing datasets from a QF-LCA, using laser cooling methods relative to high energy systems. The dataset can be used to, e.g., train quantum algorithms via quantum artificial intelligence (QAI) for a QF-LCA user. The user then decides after the algorithm predicts and suggests an efficient energy path for the system to choose. For example, an N -particle system simulated as a heat engine, by QAI classifier(s), predicts and reroutes particle energy paths on a logarithmic input-output scale. To determine system's energy change, the QDF lens code (DFC) measures entanglement entropy (EE). The algorithm's classification of EE values distinguishes entangled states in the system. The QF-LCA program employs the dataset to achieve an automated prediction and classification method, rather than dataset's manual use and analysis by the user. As the system evolves in its distribution of states, those particles not reaching a desired energy state (a target state or TS), i.e., the probability of observing a ground or excited state (GS or ES) outcome at the decoding step, can be rerouted by the heat engine to satisfy a TS outcome. This establishes a GS or ES energy profile to access and classify states by a classifier. The data points (qubits) in this profile are inverse distance-based and labelled for a specific class. After learning the profile, the classifier decodes and predicts the next system state. A QDF AI game “ Alice & Bob's Quantum Doubles, ” is developed to validate the dataset as the P ’s map for a classical/quantum prediction where the P ’s of states and the user's P ’s correlate in their value difference, Δ P . Dataset validation results are mapped to an intelligent decision simulator (IDS) as a QAI map. This maximizes system efficiency on a TS by EE of energy states (distributed in the system). Future additions to the dataset from the QAI map program can improve quantum algorithms to determine which particles of the system participate in a phase transition after state prediction. QF-LCA applications are in data science, security, forensics, particle physics, etc., such as retrieving or reconstructing information by distinguishing particle states from an evidence sample. Examples are, reconstruct damaged DNA strands of cells to predict a virus's TS, or cancer cell, its spread and growth against healthy cells, identify forged documents from genuine based on QDF's P values, and so on.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207