UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Quantum Walk Schemes for Universal Quantum Computation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Random walks are a powerful tool for the efficient implementation of algorithms in clas-sical computation. Their quantum-mechanical analogues, called quantum walks, hold similar promise. Quantum walks provide a model of quantum computation that has re-cently been shown to be equivalent in power to the standard circuit model. As in the classical case, quantum walks take place on graphs and can undergo discrete or contin-uous evolution, though quantum evolution is unitary and therefore deterministic until a measurement is made. This thesis considers the usefulness of continuous-time quantum walks to quantum computation from the perspectives of both their fundamental power under various formulations, and their applicability in practical experiments. In one extant scheme, logical gates are effected by scattering processes. The results of an exhaustive search for single-qubit operations in this model are presented. It is shown that the number of distinct operations increases exponentially with the number of vertices in the scattering graph. A catalogue of all graphs on up to nine vertices that implement single-qubit unitaries at a specific set of momenta is included in an appendix. I develop a
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.010 |
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".