Quantum Active Learning for Structural Determination of Doped Nanoparticles - A Case Study of 4Al@Si11
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Active learning (AL) has been widely applied in chemistry and materials science. In this work, we propose a quantum active learning (QAL) method for automatic structural determination of doped nanoparticles, where quantum machine learning (QML) models for regression are used iteratively to indicate new structures to be calculated by Density Functional Theory (DFT) or Density Functional Based Tight Binding (DFTB) and this new data acquisition is used to retrain the QML models. The QAL method is implemented in the Quantum Machine Learning Software/ Agent for Material Design and Discovery (QMLMaterial), whose aim is using an artificial agent (defined by QML regression algorithms) that chooses the next doped configuration to be calculated that has a higher probability of finding the optimum structure. The QAL uses a quantum Gaussian process with a fidelity quantum kernel as well as the projected quantum kernel and different quantum circuits. For comparison, classical AL was used with classical Gaussian process with different classical kernels. The presented QAL method was applied in the structural determination of doped Si11 with 4 Al (4Al@Si11) and the results indicate the QAL method is able to find the optimum 4Al@Si11 structure. The aim of this work is to present the QAL method, formulated in a noise-free quantum computing framework, for automatic structural determination of doped nanoparticles and materials defects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".