Improving the efficiency of learning-based error mitigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Error mitigation will play an important role in practical applications of near-term noisy quantum computers. Current error mitigation methods typically concentrate on correction quality at the expense of frugality (as measured by the number of additional calls to quantum hardware). To fill the need for highly accurate, yet inexpensive techniques, we introduce an error mitigation scheme that builds on Clifford data regression (CDR). The scheme improves the frugality by carefully choosing the training data and exploiting the symmetries of the problem. We test our approach by correcting long range correlators of the ground state of XY Hamiltonian on IBM Toronto quantum computer. We find that our method is an order of magnitude cheaper while maintaining the same accuracy as the original CDR approach. The efficiency gain enables us to obtain a factor of 10 improvement on the unmitigated results with the total budget as small as 2 ⋅ 10 5 shots. Furthermore, we demonstrate orders of magnitude improvements in frugality for mitigation of energy of the LiH ground state simulated with IBM's Ourense-derived noise 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".