I am reading a paper about QCNN and BP problem. And in the paper there is a part illustrating the relation between the trainability and variance of the cost. The cost function is written as,

$C(\theta)=Tr[V(\theta)\sigma V^\dagger (\theta)\tilde O]$

$\theta$ is the vector of the trainable parameters, $V(\theta)$ is the unitary that contains the gates in the convolutional and pooling layers plus the fully connected layer, $\tilde O$ is defined on the input Hilbert space such that its expectation value represents the measured value.

And we want to evaluate the partial derivative of $C(\theta)$ with respect to $\theta_\mu$, and the explicit form is

$\partial_\mu C = Tr[W_A V_L \sigma V_L^{\dagger} W_A^{\dagger} [H_\mu, W_B^\dagger V_R^\dagger\tilde O V_R W_B]]\space (*)$

where $V=V_RWV_L$, where $V_R$ and $V_L$ contain all gates in the QCNN except for W. And $W=W_BW_A, W_A=\prod_{\eta \leq \mu}e^{-i\theta_\eta H_\eta},W_A=\prod_{\eta > \mu}e^{-i\theta_\eta H_\eta}$.

I am quite confused about (*), since based on the direct derivation of $C(\theta)$, I get,

$\partial_\mu C = Tr[V_R W_B (\partial_\mu W_A) V_L \sigma V_L^\dagger W_A^\dagger W_B^\dagger V_R^\dagger \tilde O] + Tr[V_R W_B W_A V_L \sigma V_L^\dagger (\partial_\mu W_A^\dagger ) W_B^\dagger V_R^\dagger \tilde O]$

Why the relative positions of each operators are different from what I got above, and what is the specific definition of $H_\mu$ (to be more specific, how does $H_\mu$ relates to $\partial_\mu$) ?

For your reference, the the arxiv link of the original paper is https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.02966.

Any help would be appreciated!!



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.