1 / 22

Schr ödinger’s Elephants & Quantum Slide Rules

Explore how Schrödinger's elephants and quantum slide rules are used to solve NP-complete problems through approximate adiabatic evolution. Discover examples like Shor’s algorithm and Grover's algorithm, and learn about quantum error-correction and adiabatic quantum computation. This approach offers fast and exact solutions, particularly suitable for superconducting quantum circuits. Dive into the details of traveling salesman's problem and the benefits of analog operation in quantum computing.

todd
Download Presentation

Schr ödinger’s Elephants & Quantum Slide Rules

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Schrödinger’s Elephants & Quantum Slide Rules Solving NP-complete problems with approximate adiabatic evolution A.M. Zagoskin (FRS RIKEN & UBC) S. Savel’ev (FRS RIKEN & Loughborough U.) F. Nori (FRS RIKEN & U. of Michigan)

  2. Consecutive application of unitary transformations (quantum gates) Problem encoded in the initial state of the system Solution encoded in the final state of the system  digital operation Examples: Shor’s algorithm Grover’s algorithm quantum Fourier transform Precise time-domain manipulations  complex design and extra sources of decoherences Problem and solution encoded in fragile strongly entangled states of the system  effective decoherence time must be large Quantum error-correction (to extend the coherence time of the system)  overhead (threshold theorems: 104-1010(!)) Aharonov, Kitaev & Preskill, quant-ph/05102310 Standard quantum computation

  3. Continuous adiabatic evolution of the system Problem encoded in the Hamiltonian of the system Solution encoded in the final ground state of the system Farhi et al., quant- ph/0001106; Science 292(2001)472 The approach is equivalent to the standard quantum computing Aharonov et al., quant- ph/0405098 “Space-time swap”: the time-domain structure of the algorithm is translated to the time-independent structural properties of the system Ground state is relatively robust  much easier conditions on the system and its evolution Well suited for the realization by superconducting quantum circuits Kaminsky, Lloyd & Orlando, quant-ph/0403090 Grajcar, Izmalkov & Il’ichev, PRB 71(2005)144501 Adiabatic quantum computation

  4. Travelling salesman’s problem* • N points with distances dij • Let nia=1 if i is stop #a and 0 otherwise; there are N2 variables nia (i,a = 1,…,N) • The total length of the tour *See e.g. M. Kastner, Proc. IEEE 93 (2005) 1765

  5. Travelling salesman’s problem • The cost function

  6. Travelling salesman’s problem • Ising Hamiltonian

  7. Adiabaticity parameter Spin Hamiltonian

  8. Adiabatic optimization

  9. Approximate adiabatic optimization vs. simulated annealing

  10. RMT theory near centre of spectrum* Diffusive behaviour Residual energy β = 1 (GOE); 2 (GUE) Simulated annealing** ζ≤ 6 Approximate adiabatic optimization vs. simulated annealing **G.E. Santoro et al., Science 295 (2002) 2427 *M. Wilkinson, PRA 41 (1990) 4645

  11. Running time vs. residual energy • Classical/quantum simulated annealing (classical computer) • Approximate adiabatic algorithm (quantum computer)

  12. Solution is encoded in the final ground state Error produces unusable results (excited state does not, generally, encode an approximate solution) Objective: minimize the probability of leaving the ground state Solution is a (smooth enough) function of the energy of the final ground state Error produces an approximate solution (energy of the excited state is close to the ground state energy) Objective: minimize the average drift from the ground state Relevant problems: finding the ground state energy of a spin glass traveling salesman problem AQC vs. Approximate AQC

  13. Generic description of level evolution: Pechukas gas* *P. Pechukas, PRL 51 (1983) 943

  14. Pechukas gas kinetics

  15. Pechukas gas kinetics: taking into account Landau-Zener transitions

  16. Pechukas gas flow simulation

  17. Level collisions and LZ transitions

  18. “Diffusion” from the initial state

  19. Analog vs. digital

  20. 4-flux qubit register *M. Grajcar et al., PRL 96 (2006) 047006

  21. Conclusions • Eigenvalues behaviour is not described by simple diffusion • Marginal states behaviour qualitatively different: adiabatic evolution generally robust • Analog operation of quantum adiabatic computer provides exponential speedup • Advantages of Pechukas mapping: exact, provides intuitively clear description and controllable approximations (BBGKY chain) • In future: external noise sources; mean-field theory; quantitative theory of a specific algorithm realization; investigation of the class of AA-tractable problems

More Related