Document Open Access Logo

A Universal Adiabatic Quantum Query Algorithm

Authors Mathieu Brandeho, Jérémie Roland

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.TQC.2015.163.pdf
  • Filesize: 475 kB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

Keywords
  • Quantum Algorithms
  • Query Complexity
  • Adiabatic Quantum Computation
  • Adversary Method

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Abstract

Quantum query complexity is known to be characterized by the so-called quantum adversary bound. While this result has been proved in the standard discrete-time model of quantum computation, it also holds for continuous-time (or Hamiltonian-based) quantum computation, due to a known equivalence between these two query complexity models. In this work, we revisit this result by providing a direct proof in the continuous-time model. One originality of our proof is that it draws new connections between the adversary bound, a modern technique of theoretical computer science, and early theorems of quantum mechanics. Indeed, the proof of the lower bound is based on Ehrenfest's theorem, while the upper bound relies on the adiabatic theorem, as it goes by constructing a universal adiabatic quantum query algorithm. Another originality is that we use for the first time in the context of quantum computation a version of the adiabatic theorem that does not require a spectral gap.

Cite As Get BibTex

Mathieu Brandeho and Jérémie Roland. A Universal Adiabatic Quantum Query Algorithm. In 10th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2015). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 44, pp. 163-179, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2015) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.TQC.2015.163

Author Details

Mathieu Brandeho
Jérémie Roland

References

  1. Dorit Aharonov, Wim van Dam, Julia Kempe, Zeph Landau, and Seth Lloyd. Adiabatic quantum computation is equivalent to standard quantum computation. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science, pages 42-51, New York, 2004. IEEE Computer Society Press. Google Scholar
  2. Andris Ambainis. Quantum lower bounds by quantum arguments. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 64(4):750-767, 2002. Google Scholar
  3. J. E. Avron, R. Seiler, and L. G. Yaffe. Adiabatic theorems and applications to the quantum Hall effect. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 110(1):33-49, March 1987. Google Scholar
  4. Joseph E. Avron and Alexander Elgart. Adiabatic Theorem without a Gap Condition. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 203(2):445-463, June 1999. Google Scholar
  5. Robert Beals, Harry Buhrman, Richard Cleve, Michele Mosca, and Ronald de Wolf. Quantum lower bounds by polynomials. Journal of the ACM, 48:778-797, 2001. Google Scholar
  6. M. Born and V. Fock. Beweis des adiabatensatzes. Zeitschrift für Physik, 51(3-4):165-180, 1928. Google Scholar
  7. Harry Buhrman and Ronald de Wolf. Complexity measures and decision tree complexity: A survey. Theoretical Computer Science, 288(1):21-43, 2002. Google Scholar
  8. Andrew Childs and Jeffrey Goldstone. Spatial search by quantum walk. Physical Review A, 70(2):022314, August 2004. Google Scholar
  9. Andrew M. Childs. On the Relationship Between Continuous- and Discrete-Time Quantum Walk. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 294(2):581-603, October 2009. Google Scholar
  10. Andrew M. Childs and Jeffrey Goldstone. Spatial search and the Dirac equation. Physical Review A, 70(4):042312, October 2004. Google Scholar
  11. Richard Cleve, Daniel Gottesman, Michele Mosca, Rolando D. Somma, and David Yonge-Mallo. Efficient discrete-time simulations of continuous-time quantum query algorithms. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 409-416. ACM, 2009. Google Scholar
  12. P. Ehrenfest. Bemerkung über die angenäherte Gültigkeit der klassischen Mechanik innerhalb der Quantenmechanik. Zeitschrift fur Physik, 45:455-457, 1927. Google Scholar
  13. Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, and Sam Gutmann. A quantum algorithm for the Hamiltonian NAND tree. Theory of Computing, 4:169-190, 2008. Google Scholar
  14. Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann, and Michael Sipser. Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution. arXiv:0001106, 2000. Google Scholar
  15. Edward Farhi and Sam Gutmann. An analog analogue of a digital quantum computation. arXiv:9612026, 1996. Google Scholar
  16. Iain Foulger, Sven Gnutzmann, and Gregor Tanner. Quantum Search on Graphene Lattices. Physical Review Letters, 112(7):070504, February 2014. Google Scholar
  17. Christopher A. Fuchs and Jeroen van De Graaf. Cryptographic distinguishability measures for quantum-mechanical states. In IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, volume 45, pages 1216-1227, 1999. Google Scholar
  18. Peter Høyer, Troy Lee, and Robert Špalek. Negative weights make adversaries stronger. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 526-535. ACM, 2007. Google Scholar
  19. S. Jansen, M.-B. Ruskai, and R. Seiler. Bounds for the adiabatic approximation with applications to quantum computation. J. Math. Phys., 48(10):102111, 2007. Google Scholar
  20. Tosio Kato. On the Adiabatic Theorem of Quantum Mechanics. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, 5(6):435-439, November 1950. Google Scholar
  21. Troy Lee, Rajat Mittal, Ben W. Reichardt, Robert Špalek, and Mario Szegedy. Quantum query complexity of state conversion. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 344-353. IEEE Computer Society, 2011. Google Scholar
  22. Troy Lee and Jérémie Roland. A strong direct product theorem for quantum query complexity. Computational Complexity, 22(2):429-462, 2013. Google Scholar
  23. Carlos Mochon. Hamiltonian oracles. Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 75(4), 2007. Google Scholar
  24. M. Reed and B. Simon. Methods of modern mathematical physics. 2. Fourier analysis, self-adjointness. Fourier Analysis, Self-adjointness. Academic Press, 1975. Google Scholar
  25. Ben Reichardt and Robert Špalek. Span-program-based quantum algorithm for evaluating formulas. Theory of Computing, 8(13):291-319, 2012. Google Scholar
  26. Ben W. Reichardt. Span programs and quantum query complexity: The general adversary bound is nearly tight for every Boolean function. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 544-551. IEEE Computer Society, 2009. Google Scholar
  27. Ben W. Reichardt. Reflections for quantum query algorithms. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 560-569, 2011. Google Scholar
  28. Jérémie Roland and Nicolas J. Cerf. Quantum search by local adiabatic evolution. Physical Review A, 65:042308, 2002. Google Scholar
  29. W. van Dam, M. Mosca, and U. Vazirani. How powerful is adiabatic quantum computation? Proceedings 2001 IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing, pages 279-287, 2002. Google Scholar
  30. David Yonge-Mallo. Adversary lower bounds in the Hamiltonian oracle model. arXiv:1108.2479, 2011. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact