Wyniki wyszukiwania - BazTech

1

Korekcja błędów kwantowych

Romaniuk Ryszard

Elektronika : konstrukcje, technologie, zastosowania

|

2021

|

Vol. 62, nr 7

22--29

PL

Urządzenie kwantowe NISQ działa w praktyce bez zaawansowanych metod korekcji błędów kwantowych (QEC). Takiej korekcji nie można wprowadzić sprzętowo ze względu na skromność układu NISQ. Komputer UQC musi koniecznie posiadać złożone warstwy korekcji błędów na poziomach sprzętowym i programistycznym. Bez warstw QEC komputer UQC nie ma możliwości wypełnienia swoich zadań obliczeniowych. Niestety wiele z metod QEC jest silnie redundancyjnych, a więc bardzo kosztownych. Komputer UQC, mimo że dość dobrze znamy jego potencjalne właściwości, jest urządzeniem teoretycznym, w związku z czym badania nad QEC odbywają się w warstwie coraz bardziej zaawansowanych technik symulacyjnych prowadzonych oczywiście w przestrzeni komputingu klasycznego. Pewne, na razie bardzo niewielkie, możliwości eksperymentalne oferuje urządzenie NISQ. Techniki QEC definiuje się najczęściej jako specjalizowane metody stosowane w zaszumionym, rzeczywistym nieidealnym komputingu kwantowym w celu zabezpieczenia informacji kwantowej przed dekoherencją i szumem kwantowym. Równie często QEC jest stosowany do zabezpieczenia informacji w komunikacji kwantowej, gdzie stany kwantowe są transmitowane przez zaszumiony kanał kwantowy. QEC jest częścią szerszego obszaru projektowania systemu kwantowego odpornego na błędy. Inne podejścia do mitygacji błędów w systemach kwantowych zawierają: podprzestrzenie bez dekoherencji, podsystemy bezszumne, dynamiczne odsprzężenie od środowiska termodynamicznego.

EN

The NISQ quantum device works in practice without advanced quantum error correction (QEC) methods. Such a correction cannot be implemented in hardware due to the modesty of the NISQ chip. A UQC computer must necessarily have complex error correction layers at the hardware and software levels. Without QEC layers, the UQC computer cannot fulfil its computational tasks. Unfortunately, many of the QEC methods are highly redundant and therefore very expensive. The UQC computer, although we know its potential properties quite well, is a theoretical device, therefore research on QEC takes place in the layer of more and more advanced simulation techniques conducted, of course, in the space of classical computing. Certain, so far very small, experimental possibilities are offered by the NISQ device. QEC techniques are most often defined as specialized methods used in noisy, real non-ideal quantum computing to protect quantum information against decoherence and quantum noise. Equally often, QEC is used to secure information in quantum communication, where quantum states are transmitted over a noisy quantum channel. QEC is part of the wider design area of an error-tolerant quantum system. Other approaches to error mitigation in quantum systems include: subspaces without decoherence, noiseless subsystems, and dynamic decoupling from the thermodynamic environment.

2

A Computerized Tool for Education and Training on Ergonomic Risk Evaluation

Lasota A. M., Baron-Polańczyk E.

Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering

|

2018

|

Vol. 1, Iss. 1

759--765

EN

In the light of the challenges of the Industry 4.0 the weight of safety and health, and ergonomics are rising. Nowadays one of the common problem in industry are work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs). Therefore, an ergonomic risk evaluation is crucial as well the knowledge and education in this area. This paper presents a computerized tool for ergonomic education on ergonomic risk evaluation at the workplace. The tool based on quick exposure check pen and paper technique and Excel spreadsheet environment. It is easy to use and assists students in the evaluation of real as well of simulated workplaces. The proposed tool includes a few integrated parts: background description, students - observer’s and worker’s evaluation and results with visual interpretation. The preliminary evaluation of the Excel tool was carried out by students. It showed that it is useful and easy in use. And the students' opinions on the computerized tool for ergonomic risk evaluation are very encouraging and promise what was presented in this study.

3

Measurement Consistency Among Observational Job Analysis Methods During an Intervention Study

Joseph C., Imbeau D., Nastasia I.

International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics

|

2011

|

Vol. 17, No. 2

139--146

EN

Several observational methods are available for ergonomists to evaluate the exposure to musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) risk factors associated with work. Those methods can be used to evaluate the impact of modifications done at a workstation on the exposure to risk factors. Three methods (QEC, OCRA and 4D Watbak) were used to assess the exposure to MSD risk factors before and after the implementation of changes at a saw and block opening workstation. The results from those 3 methods served to compare the methods and evaluate their consistency. Comparisons among the methods showed positive association between QEC and OCRA indices, and between the QEC back index and 4D Watbak.

4

Musculoskeletal Problems Among Workers of an Iranian Sugar-Producing Factory

Choobineh A., Tabatabaee S. H., Behzadi M.

International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics

|

2009

|

Vol. 15, No. 4

419--424

EN

Background. Assessment of the level of exposure to work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) risk factors can be an appropriate basis for planning and implementing an interventional ergonomics program in the workplace. This study was conducted among workers of an Iranian sugar-producing factory to determine WMSD prevalence rate among production workers and to assess the level of exposure to WMSD risks. Materials and methods. In total, 116 workers were randomly selected from production workshops and included in the study. The Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire was used to study prevalence of WMSDs and a quick exposure check (QEC) was used to assess physical exposure to risks. Required data were videotaped. Results. Most workers (87.1%) suffered from some kind of MSD symptoms during the 12 months prior to the study. The highest prevalence was reported in knees (58.6%) and the lower back (54.3%). In 99.1% of the workers, the level exposure to MSD risks established with QEC was high and very high. Awkward postures, manual material handling, and long hours of standing were the major ergonomics problems. Conclusion. There was a here was a high rate of WMSDs in this factory. The level of exposure to WMSD risk factors was high and corrective measures for reducing risk level were essential.