Cutoff Theorems for the Equivalence of Parameterized Quantum Circuits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many promising quantum algorithms in economics, medical science, and material science rely on circuits that are parameterized by a large number of angles. To ensure that these algorithms are efficient, these parameterized circuits must be heavily optimized. However, most quantum circuit optimizers are not verified, so this procedure is known to be error-prone. For this reason, there is growing interest in the design of equivalence checking algorithms for parameterized quantum circuits. In this paper, we define a generalized class of parameterized circuits with arbitrary rotations and show that this problem is decidable for cyclotomic gate sets. We propose a cutoff-based procedure which reduces the problem of verifying the equivalence of parameterized quantum circuits to the problem of verifying the equivalence of finitely many parameter-free quantum circuits. Because the number of parameter-free circuits grows exponentially with the number of parameters, we also propose a probabilistic variant of the algorithm for cases when the number of parameters is intractably large. We show that our techniques extend to equivalence modulo global phase, and describe an efficient angle sampling procedure for cyclotomic gate sets.
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".