Benchmarking of quantum fidelity kernels for Gaussian process regression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quantum computing algorithms have been shown to produce performant quantum kernels for machine-learning classification problems. Here, we examine the performance of quantum kernels for regression problems of practical interest. For an unbiased benchmarking of quantum kernels, it is necessary to construct the most optimal functional form of the classical kernels and the most optimal quantum kernels for each given data set. We develop an algorithm that uses an analog of the Bayesian information criterion to optimize the sequence of quantum gates used to estimate quantum kernels for Gaussian process models. The algorithm increases the complexity of the quantum circuits incrementally, while improving the performance of the resulting kernels, and is shown to yield much higher model accuracy with fewer quantum gates than a fixed quantum circuit ansatz. We demonstrate that quantum kernels thus obtained can be used to build accurate models of global potential energy surfaces (PES) for polyatomic molecules. The average interpolation error of the six-dimensional PES obtained with a random distribution of 2000 energy points is 16 cm −1 for H 3 O + , 15 cm −1 for H 2 CO and 88 cm −1 for HNO 2 . We show that a compositional optimization of classical kernels for Gaussian process regression converges to the same errors. This indicates that quantum kernels can achieve the same, though not better, expressivity as classical kernels for regression problems.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it