MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403511026 · doi:10.1126/science.adg9774

Variational benchmarks for quantum many-body problems

2024· article· en· W4403511026 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of WaterlooVector Institute
FundersFlatiron HealthSimons Foundation
KeywordsMetric (unit)QuantumComputer scienceGround stateVariance (accounting)Work (physics)Statistical physicsVariational methodQuantum computerState (computer science)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationMathematicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continued development of computational approaches to many-body ground-state problems in physics and chemistry calls for a consistent way to assess its overall progress. In this work, we introduce a metric of variational accuracy, the V-score, obtained from the variational energy and its variance. We provide an extensive curated dataset of variational calculations of many-body quantum systems, identifying cases where state-of-the-art numerical approaches show limited accuracy and future algorithms or computational platforms, such as quantum computing, could provide improved accuracy. The V-score can be used as a metric to assess the progress of quantum variational methods toward a quantum advantage for ground-state problems, especially in regimes where classical verifiability is impossible.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.265 · 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