MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410852494 · doi:10.1103/msvx-1drx

Enhancing the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm in systems with large condition numbers

2025· article· en· W4410852494 on OpenAlexaff
Akshaya Jayashankar, Kenji Sugisaki, Nishanth Baskaran, V. S. Prasannaa

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyJapan Science and Technology AgencyMinistry of Electronics and Information technologyDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsHarrowComputer scienceAlgorithmBiologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm offers an exponential speedup in system size for treating linear equations of the form A x ⃗ = b ⃗ on quantum computers when compared to their traditional counterparts, it faces a challenge related to the condition number ( κ ) scaling of the A matrix. In this work, we address the issue by introducing the postselection-improved HHL (Psi-HHL) framework that operates on a simple yet effective premise: subtracting mixed and wrong signals to extract correct signals while providing the benefit of optimal scaling in the condition number of A (denoted as κ ) for large κ scenarios. This approach, which leads to minimal increase in circuit depth, has the important practical implication of having to use substantially fewer shots relative to the traditional HHL algorithm. The term “signal” refers to a feature of | x 〉 . We design circuits for overlap and expectation value estimation in the Psi-HHL framework. We demonstrate performance of Psi-HHL via numerical simulations. We carry out two sets of computations, where we go up to 26-qubit calculations, to demonstrate the ability of Psi-HHL to handle situations involving large- κ matrices via (a) a set of toy matrices, for which we go up to size 64 × 64 and κ values of up to ≈ 1 × 10 6 , and (b) application to quantum chemistry, where we consider matrices up to size 256 × 256 that reach κ of about 393. The molecular systems that we consider are Li 2 , KH, RbH, and CsH.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ResearchSame topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207