Triply efficient shadow tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given copies of a quantum state ρ, a shadow tomography protocol aims to learn all expectation values from a fixed set of observables, to within a given precision ε. We say that a shadow tomography protocol is triply efficient if it is sample- and time-efficient, and only employs measurements that entangle a constant number of copies of ρ at a time. The classical shadows protocol based on random single-copy measurements is triply efficient for the set of local Pauli observables. This and other protocols based on random singlecopy Clifford measurements can be understood as arising from fractional colorings of a graph G that encodes the commutation structure of the set of observables. Here we describe a framework for two-copy shadow tomography that uses an initial round of Bell measurements to reduce to a fractional coloring problem in an induced subgraph of G with bounded clique number. This coloring problem can be addressed using techniques from graph theory known as chi-boundedness. Using this framework we give the first triply efficient shadow tomography scheme for the set of local fermionic observables, which arise in a broad class of interacting fermionic systems in physics and chemistry. We also give a triply efficient scheme for the set of all n-qubit Pauli observables. Our protocols for these tasks use two-copy measurements, which is necessary: sample- efficient schemes are provably impossible using only single-copy measurements. Finally, we give a shadow tomography protocol that compresses an n-qubit quantum state into a poly(n )-sized classical representation, from which one can extract the expected value of any of the 4n Pauli observables in poly(n ) time, up to a small constant error.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".