Improvement of K-means Clustering Algorithm Based on Quantum State Similarity Measurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The classical K-means clustering algorithm is widely used in various fields due to its simple implementation and efficient computation, but the classical K-means clustering algorithm relies on the random selection of the initial center of mass, which is prone to fall into the deadlock of local optimality. In order to break through this limitation, the quantum K-means clustering algorithm is introduced, which is able to explore multiple potential clustering center combinations at the same time through the parallelism of quantum computation, so as to have a greater probability of converging to the globally optimal solution. Quantum K-means clustering algorithms typically employ fidelity as a similarity measure between quantum states, and similarity is assessed by calculating the probability of overlap between quantum states. However, the fidelity only quantizes the pure state information of the quantum states and ignores the classical statistical features of the data itself, which may lead to unreasonable clustering boundaries in mixed state or noise interference scenarios. In response to the above problems, this paper proposes an improved quantum-classical hybrid similarity metric, whose core idea is to incorporate the dual constraints of quantum information and classical features.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".