MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403412891 · doi:10.1080/17445760.2024.2388245

Advanced swarm intelligence algorithms in quantum circuit design

2024· article· en· W4403412891 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Parallel Emergent and Distributed Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchool of Graduate Studies, Queen's UniversityEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceSwarm intelligenceSwarm behaviourQuantum computerQuantumQuantum circuitAlgorithmComputer engineeringArtificial intelligenceParticle swarm optimizationQuantum networkPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the potential of employing algorithms like iSOMA, Differential Evolution, Particle Swarm Optimization, Grey Wolf Optimization, and Ant Colony Optimization for the design of quantum computing circuits. Utilizing the Qiskit environment, the research involved simulating a straightforward quantum circuit with variable parameters. To substantiate the effectiveness of these algorithms, three distinct experimental setups were conducted under varying conditions and degrees of freedom. The findings reveal that these algorithms are not only suitable for simulations but also excel in identifying solutions that conserve qubits. A comparative analysis of the methods was performed using the Friedman test, followed by the Nemenyi post-hoc test to evaluate their relative performance.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.259 · 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