MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7099097039

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Quantum Computation and Many Body Physics

2014· article· en· W7099097039 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResource (disambiguation)Probabilistic logicCluster stateQuantumComputationCluster (spacecraft)LOCCState (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by the underlying desire to identify novel, physically reasonable resource states for measurement-based quantum computation (MBQC), this thesis explores two seem-ingly unrelated topics in some detail. The first is a study of the circumstances under which multiqubit quantum states that are equivalent to cluster states of the same size under stochastic local operations and classical communication (SLOCC) are either deter-ministic or probabilistic resource states, with the aim of identifying new resource states that are related to, but non-trivially different from, the cluster states. The second is an analysis of the properties of the ground state of a potentially physically realisable coupled-cavity quantum electrodynamics model called the Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard (JCH) model. The hope is that the ground state of the model can in fact serve as a universal resource for MBQC. In the first study, I identify two classes of 1D states in the SLOCC-equivalence class of 1D cluster states that constitute resources for random-length single-qubit rotations, in one case quasi-deterministically (N − U − N states) and in another probabilistically

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.006

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→