Leveraging Hamiltonian simulation techniques to compile operations on bosonic devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Circuit quantum electrodynamics enables the combined use of qubits and oscillator modes. Despite a variety of available gate sets, many hybrid qubit-boson (i.e. qubit-oscillator) operations are realizable only through optimal control theory, which is oftentimes intractable and uninterpretable. We introduce an analytic approach with rigorously proven error bounds for realizing specific classes of operations via two matrix product formulas commonly used in Hamiltonian simulation, the Lie–Trotter–Suzuki and Baker–Campbell–Hausdorff product formulas. We show how this technique can be used to realize a number of operations of interest, including polynomials of annihilation and creation operators, namely ( a ) p ( a † ) q for integer p , q . We show examples of this paradigm including obtaining universal control within a subspace of the entire Fock space of an oscillator, state preparation of a fixed photon number in the cavity, simulation of the Jaynes–Cummings Hamiltonian, and simulation of the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect. This work demonstrates how techniques from Hamiltonian simulation can be applied to better control hybrid qubit-boson devices.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".