Arxiv:Quant-Ph/0401110V1 20 Jan 2004 Sapolmwihcnb Eonzdi Oyoiltime Polynomial a in Recognized Be of Can Which Problem a Is E Ofidaslto of Solution a find to Lem Machine
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A stochastic limit approach to the SAT problem Luigi Accardi† and Masanori Ohya‡ † Centro V.Volterra, Universit`adi Roma Torvergata, Via Orazio Raimondo, 00173 Roma, Italia e-mail: [email protected] ‡Department of Information Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, Noda City, Chiba 278-8510, Japan e-mail: [email protected] I. INTRODUCTION Let L = 0, 1 be a Boolean lattice with usual join and meet {, and} t (x) be the truth value of a literal ∨x ∧ Although the ability of computer is highly progressed, in X. Then the truth value of a clause C is written as there are several problems which may not be solved ef- t (C) x C t (x). Moreover≡ ∨ ∈ the set of all clauses C (j =1, 2, ,m) fectively, namely, in polynomial time. Among such prob- C j ··· lems, NP problem and NP complete problem are fun- is called satisfiable iff the meet of all truth values of Cj is 1; t ( ) m t (C ) = 1. Thus the SAT problem is damental. It is known that all NP complete problems C ≡ ∧j=1 j are equivalent and an essential question is whether there written as follows: exists an algorithm to solve an NP complete problem in Definition 3 SAT Problem: Given a Boolean set X polynomial time. They have been studied for decades ≡ and for which all known algorithms have an exponential x1, , xn and a set = 1, , m of clauses, deter- mine{ ··· whether} is satisfiableC {C or··· not.C } running time in the length of the input so far. The stan- C dard definition of P- and NP-problems is the following That is, this problem is to ask whether there exists [11,15,14,18]: a truth assignment to make satisfiable. It is known C Definition 1 Let n be the size of input. in usual algorithm that it is polynomial time to check (1)A P-problem is a problem whose time needed for solv- the satisfiability only when a specific truth assignment ing the problem is polynomial time of n. Equivalently, it is given, but we can not determine the satisfiability in is a problem which can be recognized in a polynomial time polynomial time when an assignment is not specified. of n by deterministic Turing machine. Ohya and Masuda pointed out [7] that the SAT prob- (2)An NP-problem is a problem that can be solved in poly- lem, hence all other NP problems, can be solved in poly- nomial time by a nondeterministic Turing machine. nomial time by quantum computer if the superposition of two orthogonal vectors 0 and 1 can physically de- | i | i This can be understood as follows: Let consider a prob- tected. This result was rewritten in [16] showing that lem to find a solution of f (x) = 0. We can check in poly- OM SAT-algorithm is combinatoric. nomial time of n whether x0 is a solution of f (x) = 0, The output of the OM quantum–SAT algorithm is a superposition vector α 0 + β 1 , and, in order to effec- but we do not know whether we can find the solution of | i | i f (x) = 0 in polynomial time of n. tively implement this algorithm, it is necessary to dis- tinguish this superposition from the pure vector 0 . If | i Definition 2 An NP-complete problem is a problem β is not zero but very small this detection is considered polynomialy transformed NP-problem. not to be possible with the present technology. In [10] it is shown that such a distinction can be realized by com- We take the SAT (satisfiable) problem, one of the NP- arXiv:quant-ph/0401110v1 20 Jan 2004 bining a nonlinear chaos amplifier with the OM quantum complete problems, to study whether there exists an al- algorithm, which implies the existence of a mathematical gorithm showing NPC=P. Our aim in this paper and the algorithm solving NP=P. It is not known if the amplifica- previous papers [7,9,10] is to find a quantum algorithm tion method of Ohya and Volovich is in the framework of solving the SAT problem in polynominal time of the size quantum Turing algorithm or not. So the next question of the problem. is (1) whether there exists a physical realization combin- Let X x1, , xn be a set. Then xk and its nega- ing the quantum–SAT algorithm with chaos dynamics, ≡{ ··· } tionx ¯k (k =1, 2, ,n) are called literals and the set of or (2) whether there exists another method to achieve ··· all such literals is denoted by X′ x1, x¯1, , xn, x¯n . the above distinction of two vectors by a suitable uni- ≡ { ··· } The set of all subsets of X′ is denoted by (X′) and tary evolution so that all processes can be discussed by F an element C (X′) is called a clause. We take a a quantum Turing machine (circuit). In this paper, we ∈ F truth assignment to all Boolean variables xk. If we can argue that the stochastic limit [1], can be used to find assign the truth value to at least one element of C, then another method to solve problem (2) above. C is called satisfiable. When C is satisfiable, the truth In Section 2 we review the mathematical frame of the value t (C) of C is regarded as true, otherwise, that of C OM quantum–SAT algorithm and in Section 3 we review is false. Take the truth values as ”true 1, false 0”. the representation of this algorithm given by Accardi and ↔ ↔ Then Cis satisfiable iff t (C) = 1. Sabaddini [16]. In Section 4, we state the problem to 1 2N 1 distinguish two vectors with a quick review of OV-chaos 1 − 2πitk algorithm. In Section 5 the new notion of quantum adap- exp k , √2N 2N | i tive stochastic system is proposed and we show that it kX=0 can be used to solve the problem NPC=P. The details which is called Discrete Fourier Transformation. The (e.g., proofs) of this paper is discussed in [3]. combination of the above operations gives a unitary op- erator U (t) W (t) A and the vector ξ (t)= U (t) 0 . F ≡ F | i II. QUANTUM ALGORITHM A. Channel expression of conventional unitary The quantum algorithms discussed so far are rather algorithm idealized because computation is represented by unitary operations. A unitary operation is rather difficult to re- All conventional unitary algorithms can be written as alize in physical processes, more realistic operation is one a combination of the following three steps: allowing some dissipation like semigroup dynamics. How- (1) Preparation of state: Take a state ρ (e.g., ρ = ever such dissipative dynamics destroys the entanglement 0 0 ) and apply the unitary channel defined by the hence they very much reduce the ability of quantum com- | i h | above UF (t):Λ∗ = AdU (t) putation of preserving the entanglement of states. In F F order to keep the high ability of quantum computation ΛF∗ = AdUF = ΛF∗ ρ = UF ρUF∗ and good entanglement, it will be necessary to introduce ⇒ some kind of amplification in the course of real phys- (2) Computation: Let U a unitary operator on rep- ical processes in physical devices, which will be similar resenting the computation followed by a suitableH pro- to the amplication processes in quantum communication. gramming of a certain problem, then the computation In this section, to search for more realistic operations in is described by a channel ΛU∗ = AdU (unitary channel). quantum computer, the channel expression will be useful, After the computation, the final state ρf will be at least, in the sense of mathematical scheme of quantum computation because the channel is not always unitary ρf =ΛU∗ ΛF∗ ρ. and represents many different types of dynamics. Let be a Hilbert space describing input, computa- (3) Register and Measurement: For the registration of tion andH output (result). As usual, the Hilbert space the computed result and its measurement we might need N 2 N 2 an additional system (e.g., register), so that the lifting is = 1 C , and let the basis of = 1 C be: K H ⊗ H ⊗ ∗ from ( ) to ( ) in the sense of [2] is useful e0 (= 0 )= 0 0 0 ,e1 (= 1 )= 0 Em S H S H ⊗ K | i | i ⊗ · · · ⊗ | Ni ⊗ | i | i | i⊗···⊗ to describe this stage. Thus the whole process is wrtten 0 1 , ,e2N 1 = 2 1 = 1 1 1 . | i ⊗ | i ··· − − | i ⊗ · · · ⊗ | i ⊗ | i Any number t 0, , 2N 1 can be expressed by as ··· − N ρf = m∗ (ΛU∗ ΛF∗ ρ) . (k) k 1 E t = a 2 − , t Finally we measure the state in : For instance, let k=1 K X Pk; k J be a projection valued measure (PVM) on (k) { ∈ } at =0 or = 1, so that the associated vector is written K by Λ∗ ρ = I P ρ I P , m f ⊗ k f ⊗ k N (k) k J t (= et)= a . X∈ | i ⊗k=1 t E after which we can get a desired result by observations And applying n-tuples of Hadamard matrix A in finite times if the size of the set J is small. 1 1 ≡ 1 to the vacuum vector 0 , we get √2 1 1 | i − B. Channel expression of the general quantum 1 A 0 ( = ξ (0)) N ( 0 + 1 ) . algorithm | i ≡⊗1 √2 | i | i Put When dissipation is involved the above three steps have to be generalized. Such a generalization can be expressed N 1 0 by means of suitable channel, not necessarily unitary.