MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406583398 · doi:10.1038/s41534-025-00960-y

Noise-agnostic quantum error mitigation with data augmented neural models

2025· article· en· W4406583398 on OpenAlexafffund
Manwen Liao, Yan Zhu, Giulio Chiribella, Yuxiang Yang

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Quantum Information · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaResearch Grants Council, University Grants CommitteeNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceGovernment of CanadaJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceNoise (video)Quantum error correctionQuantum noiseQuantumQuantum computerArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceComputer engineeringAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum error mitigation, a data processing technique for recovering the statistics of target processes from their noisy version, is a crucial task for near-term quantum technologies. Most existing methods require prior knowledge of the noise model or the noise parameters. Deep neural networks have the potential to lift this requirement, but current models require training data produced by ideal processes in the absence of noise. Here we build a neural model that achieves quantum error mitigation without any prior knowledge of the noise and without training on noise-free data. To achieve this feature, we introduce a quantum augmentation technique for error mitigation. Our approach applies to quantum circuits and to the dynamics of many-body and continuous-variable quantum systems, accommodating various types of noise models. We demonstrate its effectiveness by testing it both on simulated noisy circuits and on real quantum hardware.

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 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 score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Quantum InformationSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207