MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402915697 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2024.3469555

Quantum Property Learning for NISQ Networks: Universal Quantum Witness Machines

2024· article· en· W4402915697 on OpenAlexafffund
Uman Khalid, Junaid ur Rehman, Haejoon Jung, Trung Q. Duong, Octavia A. Dobre, Hyundong Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersQueen's UniversityKyung Hee UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsComputer scienceProperty (philosophy)QuantumQuantum computerTheoretical computer scienceQuantum networkPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The learning of fundamental quantum properties—namely coherence, discord, and entanglement—benchmarks the security, computational, and metrological capability of noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) communication, computing, and sensing networks. The current learning techniques vary widely for these fundamental quantum properties, including standard tomographic procedures that involve exhaustive optimization. Fortunately, the fundamentally distinct quantum properties feature an intricate connection. In this paper, we put forth the concept of universal quantum witness machines (UQWMs) to develop a unified framework for quantum property learning (QPL) of a quantum system. We first formulate the certification and quantification of quantum properties based on quantum witnesses. The witness-based certification method is experimentally accessible and resource-efficient but lacks reliability and generality. To universalize the scope and circumvent the unreliability, we transform the certification task into a classification task by employing UQWMs with classical machine learning to construct quantum property classifiers. This formalism offers a unifying perspective on the certification, quantification, and classification of these enigmatically linked fundamental quantum properties. To demonstrate our UQWM approach, we provide a comparative numerical analysis of quantum property quantification with quantum witnesses and classification performance analysis of quantum property classification with convolutional neural networks, specifically for <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$4 \times 4$ </tex-math></inline-formula> quantum systems.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207