The Chronicle of Higher Education covered the founding of TRACS after the federal investigations refused three times to grant them accrediting power. On September 4, 1991, Scott Jaschik wrote:
Education Secretary Lamar Alexander has set off a new debate over accreditation with his decision to grant federal recognition to the Transnational Association of Christian Schools. The association describes itself as “an accrediting agency for Christian institutions which believe in Biblical inerrancy, Biblical authority, the historicity of the first eleven chapters of Genesis including special creation as opposed to evolution, and other doctrines of the Gospel.”
Yes, while diversity was the real impetus, TRACS cloaked it in the religious language of Young Earth Creationism. Are we even surprised?
The Chronicle continued:
The controversy has sparked concern about the way the department manages its reviews of accrediting agencies. Thurston E. Manning, who recently retired as president of the Council on Postsecondary Accreditation, said he was “astonished” by the way Mr. Alexander had handled the case. He said he could not figure out why the Secretary would grant recognition to the group, but added: “Obviously, politics is the first thing that comes to mind.”
Members of Transnational praised Mr. Alexander and said that the criticism of their organization stemmed from hostility in higher education toward Christianity. They added that such hostility was the reason their accrediting group is needed.
TRACS: The Future of Quantum Dot Calibration and Control
A Revolutionary AI Quantum Dot Control Method
Scalable quantum computers require precise qubit manipulation, especially in semiconductor quantum dot systems. The laborious and complicated process of manually adjusting these devices has hampered our effort. This approach becomes impractical as qubits increase, causing a scaling constraint. Scientists have developed TRACS, a machine learning method that promises to autonomously, precisely, and adaptably tune quantum dots.
Fixing Quantum Dot Control Bottleneck
Charge stability diagrams track electron behaviour in quantum dots, a potential spin-based quantum computing architecture. These diagrams must be accurately interpreted to manipulate qubits, quantum computer components. Conventional methods sometimes require multiple processing stages and have problems generalising across device types, making them unsuitable for future quantum processors. Due to the need for automated tuning and characterisation, machine learning, especially deep learning, has been extensively studied to optimise quantum dot device operating points.
A New Transformer-Based End-to-End Paradigm
TRACS is a breakthrough machine learning technology that improves automatic interpretation of charge stability diagrams. Unlike other systems, TRACS is a single, end-to-end learning system, simplifying and increasing its applicability. TRACS relies on the transformer-based paradigm, first designed for natural language processing but now employed for visual object detection. This innovative model automatically identifies “triple points” and their linkages in charge stability diagrams.
TRACS is a hardware-software quantum dot control approach that prioritises scalability. This end-to-end learning system directly addresses a major bottleneck in quantum dot manufacturing and control utilising object detection transformers, enabling more reliable and scalable quantum computer architectures.
Determine Qubit Control Precision: Triple Points and Connectivity
Finding “triple points” and how they relate in charge stability diagrams is not just a technical marvel, but it is also crucial for several critical qubit control tasks. These operations include:
For precise voltage management, virtual gates must be calibrated.
Initialising charge states: Qubits start in a known state.
Adjusting for drift: Maintaining stability.
Control pulse sequencing: Quantum precision.
Identifying these properties improves quantum device control efficiency and accuracy, enabling larger and more complex quantum processors. By abstracting charge stability diagrams into connection graphs, TRACS improves device characterisation and control and simplifies algorithm tweaking.
Best Performance and Generalisation Across Architectures
A highlight of TRACS is its unmatched performance and generalisation. Data from silicon, germanium, and silicon-germanium heterostructure quantum dot devices shows that it routinely beats well-known convolutional neural networks. TRACS is highly generalisable since it performs better without retraining for different device materials or topologies.
TRACS efficiently locates triple spots with 3% voltage scan range accuracy. TRACS inference times are sometimes one to three orders of magnitude faster than CNNs. This breakthrough in precision, speed, and architecture-agnostic capability promises more dependable and scalable quantum dot control.
Facilitating Quantum Computing Scalability
This research supports the development of more reliable and efficient quantum dot-based computers. TRACS can automate and improve charge stability diagram analysis to speed up the construction of larger and more powerful quantum processors, ushering in the next wave of the Quantum Revolution. The system's simple, end-to-end learning method and suppleness in managing different device types help scale quantum computing technologies.
Transfer learning may reduce the data needed for machine learning model training, which is important in quantum dot studies. The wider body of research suggests investigating this technique. Cutting-edge machine learning, complicated modelling tools, and cryogenic electronics are creating a vibrant and rapidly emerging market for scalable and programmable quantum dot devices.
For those interested, I do a weekly astrological transit forecast with my friend Crystal ! It’s laid back and conversational intended for easy listening and learning. You can watch it on YouTube here!
Given that TRACS original purpose was to thwart diversity...
Given that TRACS used religion language to cloak its anti-diversity politics...
Given that the value of academic freedom demands that all views be represented in schools accredited through the government--including TRACS....
Given that Young Earth Creationists insist diversity doesn't apply to them but only to their opponents...
What can we do about the CHEA upcoming approval (or re-approval) of TRACS?
Strangely enough, it's difficult to find any place to contact the CHEA about such problems. Their policy states that their accrediting agencies need to have
policies or procedures that call for substantive and timely response to legitimate public concerns and complaints (10)
But where do we contact them?
It seems that Professor Swamidass' strategy calling for public scrutiny is the only way. There's no call for third-party comments on TRACS. At least not yet.
This Spring, Washington University Professor, S. Joshua Swamidass wrote a measured, respectful editorial in the Wall Street Journal. Because the CHEA is re-considering its approval of TRACS (as part of regular oversight), Professor Swamidass wants more transparency in the creation science curriculum of TRACS schools. Here's his editorial in full:
Next week the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, or CHEA, which scrutinizes other accrediting organizations, will consider whether it should continue to recognize a young Earth creationist group. This might seem like a classic instance of the tension between religion and science. But the real issue is whether Americans can live alongside each other while disagreeing about the most important issues.
The Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools, known as Tracs, describes itself “as a national institutional accrediting agency for Christian post-secondary institutions, colleges, universities, and seminaries.” Founded in the late 1970s, the group today accredits more than 80 schools around the world. That includes Bob Jones University, which grants science degrees that require course credits in creation science.
The Tracs statement of faith includes conventional Christian beliefs about the “unique divine, plenary, verbal inspiration and absolute authority” of the Bible and the “redemptive sacrifice of Jesus Christ.” It also holds the “special creation of the existing space-time universe and all its basic systems and kinds of organisms in the six literal days of the creation week” to be true.
In the early years, Tracs had its applications for recognition denied by the U.S. Education Department. It finally gained federal recognition during the George H.W. Bush presidency. Eventually, in 2001, Tracs was recognized by CHEA. The council periodically reviews member institutions to assess whether they meet its standards. CHEA has been soliciting comments to guide its decision about renewing Tracs.
As a medical doctor and research scientist, I reject young Earth creationism as a valid scientific theory. Like most scientists, I perceive a readily observable fact: Earth is billions of years old. And many of my colleagues believe that CHEA shouldn’t have admitted Tracs in the first place.
But a 2019 Gallup poll showed that 40% of American adults “ascribe to a strictly creationist view of human origins, believing that God created them in their present form within roughly the past 10,000 years.” As much as the scientific community disagrees, creationism is not going away.
Rather than reject Tracs or passively renew its membership, CHEA should offer a constructive solution that holds the group to higher standards on science education. There is a complex thicket of concerns to negotiate: creationist belief statements, academic freedom and national norms. A committee that includes mainstream scientists could gather information and develop detailed recommendations for the institution to adopt. Absent some principled compromise, a renewal of Tracs membership should be delayed or denied.
One helpful principle is transparency. As a matter of academic freedom, scientists should tolerate institutions that teach creation science. But deviations from national norms in a science curriculum need to be prominently disclosed, tracked and reported. In practice, that means transcripts that clearly state which courses and degrees include creation science. Credit from courses that include creation science should not be used toward science degrees. Nor should they be eligible for transfer to secular institutions.
Institutional tolerance of dissenting views ought to be a two-way street. If Tracs is recognized, it should also give more space to students and faculty who disagree over key issues. Tracs member institutions operate by belief or faith statements, with varying levels of tolerance for dissent. A reasonable process would not require creationist institutions to modify their faith statements. But to align with national norms, Tracs should defend the academic freedom of those who dissent from scientific creationism.
Identifying and implementing the correct remedies will take time, and may still be controversial among Tracs membership. But they should understand the significant benefits for their universities if brought into alignment with national educational norms.
The U.S. public arena is secular but also pluralistic. Americans disagree with one another, and those differences matter. Avoiding conflict by unconditionally renewing Tracs’ membership is an unacceptable approach. But we need a more constructive solution than simply excluding those with whom we disagree—even if they seem obviously wrong, as creationists do.
The best solution is to respect Tracs institutions’ unique character while holding them to high academic standards. Insisting on policies of transparency and academic freedom might even lay the groundwork for change in future generations.
Dr. Swamidass, founder of Peaceful Science, is an associate professor of laboratory and genomic medicine and biomedical engineering at Washington University in St. Louis.
Long before Betsy DeVos was attempting to destroy education, Secretary Lamar Alexander was doing his part in the George H. W. Bush administration. And because TRACS is in the news again, let's go back a bit.
In 1991, DoE Secretary was threatening to take away federal approval for the Middle States Accrediting Association of Colleges and Schools. Why?
MSACS had the unmitigated gall to raise diversity standards for its schools. Howard Simmons, the MSACS executive director, said as much in 1991. Read it for yourself in the Philadelphia Inquirer:
Notice there in the second column. Do you see it? Lamar Alexander said that Middle States' actions "against Westminster" Seminary "post a threat to religious and academic freedom."
Yes, having an all-male and all-white governing board for a parachurch organization is a religious doctrine now. Sound familiar?
The NYTimes covered it too in June 1991:
Diversity was the dirty word that motivated the founding of TRACS. A woman giving advice or a Black man lecturing -- this is what was so threatening to these white men.
