Contains several computer vision models, e.g. ResNet, all of them including pre-trained versions on some dataset, which is quite sweet.
Documentation: pytorch.org/vision/stable/index.html
Stopped 2019 apparently. Shame. We need something to be upstreamed!
- source code: github.com/atrosinenko/qemujs
- demo: atrosinenko.github.io/qemujs-demo/
- demo source code: github.com/atrosinenko/qemujs-demo
K-pop is even more evil than pop music: www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdOA5BCwBi0 Confessions Of A Former K-pop Idol (ft. Crayon Pop) by Asian Boss (2019)
Organelle that is only present in prokaryotes.
Can be approximated with a diaphragm.
Fixed quantum angular momentum in a given direction.
Can range between .
E.g. consider gallium which is 1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p6 4s2 3d10 4p1:
- the electrons in s-orbitals such as 1s, 2d, and 3d are , and so the only value for is 0
- the electrons in p-orbitals such as 2p, 3p and 4p are , and so the possible values for are -1, 0 and 1
- the electrons in d-orbitals such as 2d are , and so the possible values for are -2, -1, 0 and 1 and 2
The z component of the quantum angular momentum is simply:so e.g. again for gallium:
- s-orbitals: necessarily have 0 z angular momentum
- p-orbitals: have either 0, or z angular momentum
Note that this direction is arbitrary, since for a fixed azimuthal quantum number (and therefore fixed total angular momentum), we can only know one direction for sure. is normally used by convention.
catalog.ngc.nvidia.com/orgs/nvidia/resources/resnet_50_v1_5_for_pytorch explains:
The difference between v1 and v1.5 is that, in the bottleneck blocks which requires downsampling, v1 has stride = 2 in the first 1x1 convolution, whereas v1.5 has stride = 2 in the 3x3 convolution.This difference makes ResNet50 v1.5 slightly more accurate (~0.5% top1) than v1, but comes with a smallperformance drawback (~5% imgs/sec).
One important area of research and development of quantum computing is the development of benchmarks that allow us to compare different quantum computers to decide which one is more powerful than the other.
Ideally, we would like to be able to have a single number that predicts which computer is more powerful than the other for a wide range of algorithms.
However, much like in CPU benchmarking, this is a very complex problem, since different algorithms might perform differently in different architectures, making it very hard to sum up the architecture's capabilities to a single number as we would like.
The only thing that is directly comparable across computers is how two machines perform for a single algorithm, but we want a single number that is representative of many algorithms.
For example, the number of qubits would be a simple naive choice of such performance predictor number. But it is very imprecise, since other factors are also very important:
- qubit error rate
- coherence time, which determines the maximum circuit depth
- qubit connectivity. Can you only connect to 4 neighbouring qubits in a 2D plane? Or to every other qubit equally as well?
Quantum volume is another less naive attempt at such metric.
There are unlisted articles, also show them or only show them.