@christopher-k-long.bsky.social
4th year PhD student at the University of Cambridge focusing on Quantum Computing (he/him) Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=GRSIcsEAAAAJ GitHub: https://github.com/Christopher-K-Long ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3230-942X
[1] G. K. Pullum, 50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Apr. 2009. Original url:
www.chronicle.com/article/50-y.... PDF download from @archive.org (no sign-in required): web.archive.org/web/20260208....
[2] @archive.org: web.archive.org/web/20220811...
3/3
I found Pullum's critical essay, 50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice, helpful in discerning Strunk & White's rules from suggestions [1]. Pullum's essay is heavy-handed, and a counter-critique can be found in the following Stack Exchange answer: english.stackexchange.com/a/3223/695205 [2].
2/3
I finally read The Elements of Style by Strunk & White; I should have read it on day one of my PhD. At least I read it before writing my thesis. A free copy can be found on Kobo: www.kobo.com/ebook/the-el....
1/3
I second the Hyperion Cantos
I've only read a couple of books from the Hainish Cycle; now I'm really excited for the rest. Maybe the dispossessed will have to be next.
In the left hand of darkness at first names are used but not explained. After a few chapters some you can infer some and some are explained.
Unfortunately, it looks like you need third-party apps to create markdown-style links on @bsky.app:
I have finally finished mirroring my scientific @github.com repositories to @gitlab.com. Here is a tutorial by [justncodes](github.com/justncodes) which I modified: github.com/Christopher-...
Congrats on the successful year @mouhaqh.bsky.social, looks like I should your articles a read when I'm back to work!
Now is not a good time for citations: Miss-citing online-only journals and Google Scholar indexing non-existent articles cited by hallucinating LLMs. Maybe the silver lining is that this will undermine metrics such as citation counts and h-indices, forcing academics to be judged more holistically.
For example, numerical quantum optimal control techniques such as GRAPE and CRAB fall within the framework of VQAs and are used ubiquitously today to tune quantum processors.
My point is I wouldn't declare VQAs doomed—that's too strong. Most no-go theorems have loopholes and assumptions. They tell us where it is still worth looking. I would just say that VQAs' use cases are increasingly constrained, and so there are probably more promising directions.
Given the drastic improvements in noise tolerance of VQE algorithms since colleagues and I wrote [doi:10.1038/s41534-024-00808-x](doi.org/10.1038/s415...), it may even be possible to use coherently executed shots to improve the runtime of expectation value estimation.
The large shot count is a problem. I hope that better techniques for estimating expectation values will be developed.
Given that many alternative methods for eigenvalue estimation require polynomial overlap between the initial state and the eigenstate, it may be that VQAs are still needed for initial-state preparation.
Guarantees are good but not vital. I think once there is good enough hardware someone will run the best known VQE for a molecule (like FeMoco) and it will either work or it won't. They will probably use tricks like adaptivity, pulse optimization, and error mitigation as asymptotics won't matter.
Thank you for the reference, I will add it to the read list
I agree with this for non-adaptive VQAs. Last I checked, no one had proved barren plateaus cause problems for adaptive VQAs—[numerical evidence](doi.org/10.1038/s415...) suggests the contrary. There is still some life in VQAs. Nonetheless, I'm glad to have diversified my research away from VQAs.
Wish I could have gone, looking forward to #QuiDiQua4!
Thank you for sharing this! Please give us an update of you hear back from Springer Nature.
Starting next year, Android will no longer be the open computing platform we were promised: keepandroidopen.org
At a glance this looks like it considers higher orders than Fermi's Golden rule so should give a better estimate. I hadn't thought about phonon spin coupling—which seems important in your use case. Phonon spin coupling could also be studied with Fermi's Golden rule. But higher orders are better.
I think being hit by a meteroid might be harder to error correct than by a few cosmic rays...
Let me know if this helps :)
Note due to approximations the rule breaks down for large t. Differentiating this at t=0 will give the initial rate, R, where the approximations are most valid. The if amplitude damping noise is modeled as 1-e^{-t/T1} then differentiating at zero we can fit for T1 and we find T1=1/R.
I don't know anything about diradical molecules, but hopeful the following is helpful:
In the stack I retain the sinc terms. You can either approx these as delta function first or just integrate the probability over the emission frequency. This will give total probability of emission after a time t.
It looks like Bluesky doesn't like transparent images. Here is take two:
"A good description of the phase estimation algorithm can be found in Mosca's Ph.D. thesis"—of which I found a copy here:
www.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~holub/soubo...
(4/4)
Cleve, Ekert, Macchiavello and Mosca (doi.org/10.1098/rspa...) "integrated several of the techniques of Shor and Kitaev"—section 5 and figure 6 present the algorithm as we know it today.
(3/4)