MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406261238 · doi:10.1109/qce60285.2024.00196

Structural Modifications in Quantum-Assisted Training for General Boltzmann Machines

2024· article· en· W4406261238 on OpenAlexaff
Jose P. Pinilla, Steven J. E. Wilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuantumBoltzmann machineBoltzmann constantTraining (meteorology)Statistical physicsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum-assisted training of machine learning models makes use of the sampling capabilities of quantum computing devices to approximate the probability distribution of classical generative machine learning models. One example of this is the use of quantum annealers to sample from a Boltzmann distribution to assist the computation of gradients required to train Boltzmann machines (BMs). Doing so requires the interactions and weights of a BM to be mapped onto the underlying qubit connectivity built into the quantum device hardware. This opens the possibility of formulating any graph topology as a BM, instead of the more common classical approach of restricting their connectivity; i.e., Restricted Boltz-mann Machine (RBM). This work is focused on simultaneous modifications of the connectivity and qubit mapping of general BMs, which we refer to as structure-aware minor-embedding. We show how minor-embedding can be performed taking into account the nature of the BM. We also evaluate weight “pruning”, which is motivated by the intuition that, when a QAML model is pruned, the resulting qubit chains resulting from the minor-embedding methods can provide better quality samples, at the expense of a smaller model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207