DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1908.04480V2 [Quant-Ph] 23 Oct 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1908.04480V2 [Quant-Ph] 23 Oct 2020 Quantum adiabatic machine learning with zooming Alexander Zlokapa,1 Alex Mott,2 Joshua Job,3 Jean-Roch Vlimant,1 Daniel Lidar,4 and Maria Spiropulu1 1Division of Physics, Mathematics & Astronomy, Alliance for Quantum Technologies, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA 2DeepMind Technologies, London, UK 3Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center, Sunnyvale, CA 94089, USA 4Departments of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Chemistry, and Physics & Astronomy, and Center for Quantum Information Science & Technology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA Recent work has shown that quantum annealing for machine learning, referred to as QAML, can perform comparably to state-of-the-art machine learning methods with a specific application to Higgs boson classification. We propose QAML-Z, a novel algorithm that iteratively zooms in on a region of the energy surface by mapping the problem to a continuous space and sequentially applying quantum annealing to an augmented set of weak classifiers. Results on a programmable quantum annealer show that QAML-Z matches classical deep neural network performance at small training set sizes and reduces the performance margin between QAML and classical deep neural networks by almost 50% at large training set sizes, as measured by area under the ROC curve. The significant improvement of quantum annealing algorithms for machine learning and the use of a discrete quantum algorithm on a continuous optimization problem both opens a new class of problems that can be solved by quantum annealers and suggests the approach in performance of near-term quantum machine learning towards classical benchmarks. I. INTRODUCTION lem Hamiltonian, ensuring that the system remains in the ground state if the system is perturbed slowly enough, as given by the energy gap between the ground state and Machine learning has gained an increasingly impor- the first excited state [36{38]. The ground state of the tant role in scientific discovery across chemistry, biol- problem Hamiltonian is then the solution (as in adiabatic ogy, environmental science, and physics [1{5], including quantum computing [39, 40]), although thermal excita- in the discovery of the Higgs boson [6]. Various quantum tions may move the system out of the ground state [41{ computing algorithms have been proposed for machine 47],which can be beneficial [48{51]. It is crucial to ob- learning [7], including support vector machines, princi- serve that evidence of a quantum speedup in quantum pal component analysis, least-squares fitting, topological annealing remains uncertain [52{54], although quantum analysis, and other optimization problems [8{13]. Many phenomena have been observed in D-Wave quantum an- of these algorithms include strict data assumptions that nealers [55{57]. While this remains a speculative topic, provide critical caveats regarding sparsity, state prepa- quantum annealers may exhibit advantages other than a ration, and rank [14, 15]. Moreover, fault-tolerant quan- speedup, such as sampling from non-equilibrium distri- tum computing will be required to implement the large butions prepared during the anneal [58{60]. quantum circuits necessary for the proposed algorithms, which has not yet been experimentally established at a Here we propose a novel quantum algorithm inspired scale necessary for the implementation of the proposed by the previous state-of-the-art quantum annealing for algorithms. Similarly, quantum random access memory machine learning (QAML) algorithm [33], which con- (qRAM) is typically required to store classical data, but structs a single strong classifier from a linear combination engineering challenges persist in developing a sufficiently of weak classifiers with binary coefficients of 1 or 0. We large qRAM [16]. propose two modifications to QAML | zooming into the energy surface to optimize real-valued coefficients and ar- arXiv:1908.04480v2 [quant-ph] 23 Oct 2020 One promising near-term avenue for quantum machine tificially augmenting the set of weak classifiers to create learning is quantum annealing [17] (for recent reviews a stronger ensemble | and implement the proposed al- see [18{20]) which can, e.g., perform binary classifica- gorithm (QAML-Z) on the D-Wave quantum annealer to tion [21, 22], learn Bayesian network structure [23], im- benchmark the results on a Higgs classification problem, plement quantum Boltzmann machines [24], and train with available source code [61] and data [62]. deep generative models [25]. Quantum annealing is the only current quantum computing paradigm that has re- sulted in architectures with a large enough number of | II. QAML-Z ALGORITHM albeit relatively noisy | qubits [26{28] to address both real-world and fundamental science problems, e.g., in air traffic control [29], computational biology [30{32], and A. Background: QAML Algorithm high energy physics [33{35]. Under the adiabatic theorem of quantum mechanics, quantum annealing evolves from In the original QAML algorithm, a training set with an initial transverse field Hamiltonian to the target prob- S examples of labeled data fxτ ; yτ g (where xτ is an in- 2 put vector and yτ = ±1 is a binary label for signal and B. Zooming Extension background) is optimized with a set of N weak classifiers ci, each of which gives ci(xτ ) = ±1=N for a signal or By iteratively performing quantum annealing, the bi- background prediction. Given spins si 2 f0; 1g obtained nary weights on the weak classifiers can be made contin- by transforming up/down spins, let R(xτ ) be a strong uous, resulting in a stronger classifier. This is achieved classifier given by by performing a search on the real numbers, effectively N zooming in on a region of the energy surface each itera- X R(xτ ) = sici(xτ ); (1) tion (Figure1). We denote the zooming variant of quan- i=1 tum annealing for machine learning as QAML-Z. Under this reformulation, the weights of the classifiers may be i.e., an ensemble of the weak classifiers where each weak extended from the set f0; 1g to the continuous interval classifier is either turned on or off (weight 1 or 0). To [−1; 1], enabling the subtraction of classifiers to reduce minimize classification error, we simply minimize the dis- cross-correlations between weak classifiers. tance between y and R: 2 S N 2 X X jjy − Rjj = yτ − sici(xτ ) (2a) τ=1 i=1 E E E N S 2 X X = jjyjj − 2 sici(xτ )yτ i=1 τ=1 µ0(0) = 0 µ0(1) = –0.5 µ0(2) = –0.25 N N S X X X + sici(xτ )sjcj(xτ ): (2b) FIG. 1. Zooming extension. While QAML only performs i=1 j=1 τ=1 one anneal, QAML-Z iteratively updates the weight µ (indi- Removing the spin-independent term jjyjj2 and the self- cated by the red dot) of a weak classifier (index 0 in the dia- 2 gram) in the strong classifier ensemble by performing a binary spin interactions ci (xτ ) to construct a problem suitable for quantum annealing, we rewrite the Hamiltonian as search over the energy surface using spin up/down outcomes. follows (scaling by a factor of 2 for convenience after ma- nipulating indices): Let each qubit have a mean µi(t) (starting at µi(0) = 0 t N N S N S for all i) and let the search breadth be σ(t) = b , where X X X X X H = s c (x )s c (x ) − s c (x )y : t = 0; 1; :::; T − 1 for T iterations and 0 < b < 1 i i τ j j τ i i τ τ is a free parameter. Each iteration, the Hamiltonian i=1 j>i τ=1 i=1 τ=1 (3) is centered around the previous mean and the search For convenience, we define the variables: breadth is narrowed. Receiving spin up or spin down corresponds to shifting the new mean either right or S X left by a distance given by the search breadth. The Cij = ci(xτ )cj(xτ ); (4) weight given to each classifier is thus updated accord- τ=1 ing to the old mean and consequent shift, resulting in S X a modified Hamiltonian according to the substitution Ci = ci(xτ )yτ : (5) sici(xτ ) ! σ(t)sici(xτ ) + µi(t)ci(xτ ). The full expres- τ=1 sion is: Hence, in the original QAML algorithm, the following N N S X X X Ising model Hamiltonian is minimized after transforming H(t) = σ(t)s c (x ) + µ (t)c (x ) the range to s 2 {−1; 1g, adding an additional λ regu- i i τ i i τ i i=1 j>i τ=1 larization hyperparameter to penalize nonzero si [22]: × σ(t)sjcj(xτ ) + µj(t)cj(xτ ) N 0 N 1 N N X 1 X 1 X X N S H = @λ − Ci + CijA si + Cijsisj; X X 2 4 − σ(t)sici(xτ ) + µi(t)ci(xτ ) yτ (7a) i=1 j>i i=1 j>i i=1 τ=1 (6) N 0 N 1 X X We observe the following limitations in the QAML al- = @−Ci + µj(t)CijA σ(t)si gorithm: i) arbitrary linear combinations of weak clas- i=1 j=1 sifiers ci are forbidden because the strong classifier R is N N X X 2 simply formed by turning weak classifiers ci on or off; ii) + Cijσ (t)sisj; (7b) the diversity of the ensemble is limited by the selection i=1 j>i of weak classifiers. If the set of weak classifiers can be expanded, more nuanced ensembles with more complex where Eq. (7b) is derived after dropping constants from decision boundaries can be learned. the Hamiltonian and applying the same Ci and Cij no- 3 1 tation as in QAML. This new Hamiltonian may be it- Additionally, we set the zoom parameter b = 2 to per- eratively optimized for t = 0; 1;:::;T − 1 to update form a binary search over the real numbers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Information Scrambling in Computationally Complex Quantum Circuits
    Information Scrambling in Computationally Complex Quantum Circuits Xiao Mi,1, ∗ Pedram Roushan,1, ∗ Chris Quintana,1, ∗ Salvatore Mandr`a,2, 3 Jeffrey Marshall,2, 4 Charles Neill,1 Frank Arute,1 Kunal Arya,1 Juan Atalaya,1 Ryan Babbush,1 Joseph C. Bardin,1, 5 Rami Barends,1 Andreas Bengtsson,1 Sergio Boixo,1 Alexandre Bourassa,1, 6 Michael Broughton,1 Bob B. Buckley,1 David A. Buell,1 Brian Burkett,1 Nicholas Bushnell,1 Zijun Chen,1 Benjamin Chiaro,1 Roberto Collins,1 William Courtney,1 Sean Demura,1 Alan R. Derk,1 Andrew Dunsworth,1 Daniel Eppens,1 Catherine Erickson,1 Edward Farhi,1 Austin G. Fowler,1 Brooks Foxen,1 Craig Gidney,1 Marissa Giustina,1 Jonathan A. Gross,1 Matthew P. Harrigan,1 Sean D. Harrington,1 Jeremy Hilton,1 Alan Ho,1 Sabrina Hong,1 Trent Huang,1 William J. Huggins,1 L. B. Ioffe,1 Sergei V. Isakov,1 Evan Jeffrey,1 Zhang Jiang,1 Cody Jones,1 Dvir Kafri,1 Julian Kelly,1 Seon Kim,1 Alexei Kitaev,1, 7 Paul V. Klimov,1 Alexander N. Korotkov,1, 8 Fedor Kostritsa,1 David Landhuis,1 Pavel Laptev,1 Erik Lucero,1 Orion Martin,1 Jarrod R. McClean,1 Trevor McCourt,1 Matt McEwen,1, 9 Anthony Megrant,1 Kevin C. Miao,1 Masoud Mohseni,1 Wojciech Mruczkiewicz,1 Josh Mutus,1 Ofer Naaman,1 Matthew Neeley,1 Michael Newman,1 Murphy Yuezhen Niu,1 Thomas E. O'Brien,1 Alex Opremcak,1 Eric Ostby,1 Balint Pato,1 Andre Petukhov,1 Nicholas Redd,1 Nicholas C.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Permutation Synchronization
    (I) QUBO Preparation (II) Quantum Annealing (III) Global Synchronization Quantum Permutation Synchronization 1;? 2;? 2 1 Tolga Birdal Vladislav Golyanik Christian Theobalt Leonidas Guibas Unembedding 1Stanford University 2Max Planck Institute for Informatics, SIC QUBO Problem Logical Abstract Formulation We present QuantumSync, the first quantum algorithm for solving a synchronization problem in the context of com- puter vision. In particular, we focus on permutation syn- Embedding chronization which involves solving a non-convex optimiza- Quantum Annealing tion problem in discrete variables. We start by formulating Solution synchronization into a quadratic unconstrained binary opti- mization problem (QUBO). While such formulation respects Unembedding the binary nature of the problem, ensuring that the result is a set of permutations requires extra care. Hence, we: (i) Figure 1. Overview of QuantumSync. QuantumSync formulates show how to insert permutation constraints into a QUBO permutation synchronization as a QUBO and embeds its logical instance on a quantum computer. After running multiple anneals, problem and (ii) solve the constrained QUBO problem on it selects the lowest energy solution as the global optimum. the current generation of the adiabatic quantum computers D-Wave. Thanks to the quantum annealing, we guarantee reconstruction and multi-shape analysis pipelines [86, 23, global optimality with high probability while sampling the 25] because it heavy-lifts the global constraint satisfaction energy landscape to yield confidence estimates. Our proof- while respecting the geometry of the parameters. In fact, of-concepts realization on the adiabatic D-Wave computer most of the multiview-consistent inference problems can be demonstrates that quantum machines offer a promising way expressed as some form of a synchronization [108, 15].
    [Show full text]
  • Achievements of the IARPA-QEO and DARPA-QAFS Programs & The
    Achievements of the IARPA-QEO and DARPA-QAFS programs & The prospects for quantum enhancement with QA Elizabeth Crosson & DL, Nature Reviews Physics (2021) AQC 20201 June 22, 2021 Daniel Lidar USC A decade+ since the D‐Wave 1: where does QA stand? Numerous studies have attempted to demonstrate speedups using the D-Wave processors. Some studies have succeeded in A scaling speedup against path-integral Monte demonstrating constant-factor Carlo was claimed for quantum simulation of speedups in optimization against all geometrically frustrated magnets (scaling of classical algorithms they tried, e.g., relaxation time in escape from topological frustrated cluster-loop problems [1]. obstructions) [2]. Simulation is a natural and promising QA application. But QA was originally proposed as an optimization heuristic. No study so far has demonstrated an unequivocal scaling speedup in optimization. [1] S. Mandrà, H. Katzgraber, Q. Sci. & Tech. 3, 04LT01 (2018) [2] A. King et al., arXiv:1911.03446 What could be the reasons for the lack of scaling speedup? • Perhaps QA is inherently a poor algorithm? More on this later. • Control errors? Random errors in the final Hamiltonian (J-chaos) have a strong detrimental effect. • Such errors limit the size of QA devices that can be expected to accurately solve optimization instances without error correction/suppression [1,2]. • Decoherence? Single-qubit and ≪ anneal time. Often cited as a major problem of QA relative to the gate-model. • How important is this? Depends on weak vs strong coupling to the environment [3]. More on this later as well. [1] T. Albash, V. Martin‐Mayor, I. Hen, Q.
    [Show full text]
  • Why and When Is Pausing Beneficial in Quantum Annealing?
    Why and when pausing is beneficial in quantum annealing Huo Chen1, 2 and Daniel A. Lidar1, 2, 3, 4 1Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA 2Center for Quantum Information Science & Technology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA 3Department of Chemistry, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA 4Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA Recent empirical results using quantum annealing hardware have shown that mid anneal pausing has a surprisingly beneficial impact on the probability of finding the ground state for of a variety of problems. A theoretical explanation of this phenomenon has thus far been lacking. Here we provide an analysis of pausing using a master equation framework, and derive conditions for the strategy to result in a success probability enhancement. The conditions, which we identify through numerical simulations and then prove to be sufficient, require that relative to the pause duration the relaxation rate is large and decreasing right after crossing the minimum gap, small and decreasing at the end of the anneal, and is also cumulatively small over this interval, in the sense that the system does not thermally equilibrate. This establishes that the observed success probability enhancement can be attributed to incomplete quantum relaxation, i.e., is a form of beneficial non-equilibrium coupling to the environment. I. INTRODUCTION lems [23] and training deep generative machine learn- ing models [24]. Numerical studies [25, 26] of the p-spin Quantum annealing [1{4] stands out among the multi- model also agree with these empirical results.
    [Show full text]
  • Explorations in Quantum Neural Networks with Intermediate Measurements
    ESANN 2020 proceedings, European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks, Computational Intelligence and Machine Learning. Online event, 2-4 October 2020, i6doc.com publ., ISBN 978-2-87587-074-2. Available from http://www.i6doc.com/en/. Explorations in Quantum Neural Networks with Intermediate Measurements Lukas Franken and Bogdan Georgiev ∗Fraunhofer IAIS - Research Center for ML and ML2R Schloss Birlinghoven - 53757 Sankt Augustin Abstract. In this short note we explore a few quantum circuits with the particular goal of basic image recognition. The models we study are inspired by recent progress in Quantum Convolution Neural Networks (QCNN) [12]. We present a few experimental results, where we attempt to learn basic image patterns motivated by scaling down the MNIST dataset. 1 Introduction The recent demonstration of Quantum Supremacy [1] heralds the advent of the Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) [2] technology, where signs of supe- riority of quantum over classical machines in particular tasks may be expected. However, one should keep in mind the limitations of NISQ-devices when study- ing and developing quantum-algorithmic solutions - among other things, these include limits on the number of gates and qubits. At the same time the interaction of quantum computing and machine learn- ing is growing, with a vast amount of literature and new results. To name a few applications, the well-known HHL algorithm [3], quantum phase estimation [5] and inner products speed-up techniques lead to further advances in Support Vector Machines [4] and Principal Component Analysis [6, 7]. Intensive progress and ongoing research has also been made towards quantum analogues of Neural Networks (QNN) [8, 9, 10].
    [Show full text]
  • Error Suppression and Error Correction in Adiabatic Quantum Computation: Techniques and Challenges
    PHYSICAL REVIEW X 3, 041013 (2013) Error Suppression and Error Correction in Adiabatic Quantum Computation: Techniques and Challenges Kevin C. Young* and Mohan Sarovar Scalable and Secure Systems Research (08961), Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California 94550, USA Robin Blume-Kohout Advanced Device Technologies (01425), Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, USA (Received 10 September 2012; revised manuscript received 23 July 2013; published 13 November 2013) Adiabatic quantum computation (AQC) has been lauded for its inherent robustness to control imperfections and relaxation effects. A considerable body of previous work, however, has shown AQC to be acutely sensitive to noise that causes excitations from the adiabatically evolving ground state. In this paper, we develop techniques to mitigate such noise, and then we point out and analyze some obstacles to further progress. First, we examine two known techniques that leverage quantum error-detecting codes to suppress noise and show that they are intimately related and may be analyzed within the same formalism. Next, we analyze the effectiveness of such error-suppression techniques in AQC, identify critical constraints on their performance, and conclude that large-scale, fault-tolerant AQC will require error correction, not merely suppression. Finally, we study the consequences of encoding AQC in quantum stabilizer codes and discover that generic AQC problem Hamiltonians rapidly convert physical errors into uncorrectable logical errors. We present several techniques to remedy this problem, but all of them require unphysical resources, suggesting that the adiabatic model of quantum computation may be fundamentally incompatible with stabilizer quantum error correction. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevX.3.041013 Subject Areas: Quantum Physics, Quantum Information I.
    [Show full text]
  • High Energy Physics Quantum Computing
    High Energy Physics Quantum Computing Quantum Information Science in High Energy Physics at the Large Hadron Collider PI: O.K. Baker, Yale University Unraveling the quantum structure of QCD in parton shower Monte Carlo generators PI: Christian Bauer, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Co-PIs: Wibe de Jong and Ben Nachman (LBNL) The HEP.QPR Project: Quantum Pattern Recognition for Charged Particle Tracking PI: Heather Gray, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Co-PIs: Wahid Bhimji, Paolo Calafiura, Steve Farrell, Wim Lavrijsen, Lucy Linder, Illya Shapoval (LBNL) Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering on a Quantum Computer PI: Rajan Gupta, Los Alamos National Laboratory Co-PIs: Joseph Carlson (LANL); Alessandro Roggero (UW), Gabriel Purdue (FNAL) Particle Track Pattern Recognition via Content-Addressable Memory and Adiabatic Quantum Optimization PI: Lauren Ice, Johns Hopkins University Co-PIs: Gregory Quiroz (Johns Hopkins); Travis Humble (Oak Ridge National Laboratory) Towards practical quantum simulation for High Energy Physics PI: Peter Love, Tufts University Co-PIs: Gary Goldstein, Hugo Beauchemin (Tufts) High Energy Physics (HEP) ML and Optimization Go Quantum PI: Gabriel Perdue, Fermilab Co-PIs: Jim Kowalkowski, Stephen Mrenna, Brian Nord, Aris Tsaris (Fermilab); Travis Humble, Alex McCaskey (Oak Ridge National Lab) Quantum Machine Learning and Quantum Computation Frameworks for HEP (QMLQCF) PI: M. Spiropulu, California Institute of Technology Co-PIs: Panagiotis Spentzouris (Fermilab), Daniel Lidar (USC), Seth Lloyd (MIT) Quantum Algorithms for Collider Physics PI: Jesse Thaler, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Co-PI: Aram Harrow, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Quantum Machine Learning for Lattice QCD PI: Boram Yoon, Los Alamos National Laboratory Co-PIs: Nga T. T. Nguyen, Garrett Kenyon, Tanmoy Bhattacharya and Rajan Gupta (LANL) Quantum Information Science in High Energy Physics at the Large Hadron Collider O.K.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Processor
    Article https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5 Supplementary information Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor In the format provided by the Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Joseph C. Bardin, Rami Barends, Rupak authors and unedited Biswas, Sergio Boixo, Fernando G. S. L. Brandao, David A. Buell, Brian Burkett, Yu Chen, Zijun Chen, Ben Chiaro, Roberto Collins, William Courtney, Andrew Dunsworth, Edward Farhi, Brooks Foxen, Austin Fowler, Craig Gidney, Marissa Giustina, Rob Graff, Keith Guerin, Steve Habegger, Matthew P. Harrigan, Michael J. Hartmann, Alan Ho, Markus Hoffmann, Trent Huang, Travis S. Humble, Sergei V. Isakov, Evan Jeffrey, Zhang Jiang, Dvir Kafri, Kostyantyn Kechedzhi, Julian Kelly, Paul V. Klimov, Sergey Knysh, Alexander Korotkov, Fedor Kostritsa, David Landhuis, Mike Lindmark, Erik Lucero, Dmitry Lyakh, Salvatore Mandrà, Jarrod R. McClean, Matthew McEwen, Anthony Megrant, Xiao Mi, Kristel Michielsen, Masoud Mohseni, Josh Mutus, Ofer Naaman, Matthew Neeley, Charles Neill, Murphy Yuezhen Niu, Eric Ostby, Andre Petukhov, John C. Platt, Chris Quintana, Eleanor G. Rieffel, Pedram Roushan, Nicholas C. Rubin, Daniel Sank, Kevin J. Satzinger, Vadim Smelyanskiy, Kevin J. Sung, Matthew D. Trevithick, Amit Vainsencher, Benjamin Villalonga, Theodore White, Z. Jamie Yao, Ping Yeh, Adam Zalcman, Hartmut Neven & John M. Martinis Nature | www.nature.com Supplementary information for \Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor" Google AI Quantum and collaboratorsy (Dated: October 8, 2019) CONTENTS 2. Universality for SU(2) 30 G. Circuit variants 30 I. Device design and architecture2 1. Gate elision 31 2. Wedge formation 31 II. Fabrication and layout2 VIII. Large scale XEB results 31 III.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses Quantum search at low temperature in the single avoided crossing model PATEL, PARTH,ASHVINKUMAR How to cite: PATEL, PARTH,ASHVINKUMAR (2019) Quantum search at low temperature in the single avoided crossing model, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/13285/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Quantum search at low temperature in the single avoided crossing model Parth Ashvinkumar Patel A Thesis presented for the degree of Master of Science by Research Dr. Vivien Kendon Department of Physics University of Durham England August 2019 Dedicated to My parents for supporting me throughout my studies. Quantum search at low temperature in the single avoided crossing model Parth Ashvinkumar Patel Submitted for the degree of Master of Science by Research August 2019 Abstract We begin with an n-qubit quantum search algorithm and formulate it in terms of quantum walk and adiabatic quantum computation.
    [Show full text]
  • Daniel Lidar Interview - Special Topic of Quantum Computers Institutional Interviews Journal Interviews AUTHOR COMMENTARIES - from Special Topics Podcasts
    Home About Thomson Reuters Press Room Contact Us ● ScienceWatch Home ● Inside This Month... ● Interviews Featured Interviews Author Commentaries Special Topics : Quantum Computers : Daniel Lidar Interview - Special Topic of Quantum Computers Institutional Interviews Journal Interviews AUTHOR COMMENTARIES - From Special Topics Podcasts Quantum Computers - Published: March 2010 ● Analyses Interview Date: May 2009 Featured Analyses Daniel Lidar What's Hot In... From the Special Topic of Quantum Computers Special Topics According to our Special Topics analysis of quantum computers research over the past decade, the work of Dr. Daniel Lidar ranks at #4 by total ● Data & Rankings number of papers, based on 79 papers cited a total of 1,814 times between Sci-Bytes January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2009. Fast Breaking Papers In the Web of Science®, Dr. Lidar currently has 113 original articles, reviews, New Hot Papers and proceedings papers from 1998-2010, cited a total of 3,318 times. Six of Emerging Research Fronts these papers have been named as Highly Cited Papers in the field of Fast Moving Fronts Corporate Research Fronts Physics in Essential Science IndicatorsSM from Thomson Reuters. Research Front Maps Current Classics Top Topics Dr. Lidar is Associate Professor in the Departments of Electrical Engineering and Chemistry at the Rising Stars University of Southern California in Los Angeles. He is also the Director and co-founding member of the New Entrants USC Center for Quantum Information Science and Technology (CQIST). Country Profiles In this interview, he talks with ScienceWatch.com about his highly cited research on quantum ● About Science Watch computers. Methodology Archives What first drew your interest to the field of quantum computing? Contact Us As I was finishing my Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Books on Classical and Quantum Error-Correcting Codes
    Useful Articles and Books on Error-Correcting Codes Quantum Mechanics P. A. M. Dirac, Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Clarendon Press Oxford L. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics: the Non-relativistic Theory Albert Messiah, Quantum Mechanics, Dover Stephen Gasiorowicz, Quantum Mechanics, Wiley David J. Griffiths, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, Cambridge University Press; undergraduate level J. J. Sakurai, Quantum Mechanics, (revised edition) Addison-Wesley John von Neumann, Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics", Prince- ton University Press, 1955. J. S. Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics", Cambridge University Press, 1987 The Theory of Observation in Quantum Mechanics by Fritz London and Ed- mund Bauer, a set of lectures given at the Sorbonne in June 1939. Robert B. Griffiths, Consistent Quantum Theory, Cambridge University Press (2002) Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich, Quantum Paradoxes Wiley-VCH (2005) 1 Classical Codes C. E. Shannon, A Mathematical Theory of Communication, The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol 27, 379-423, 623-656, July October 1948. Reissued De- cember 1957. L´eonBrillouin, La Science et la Th´eoriede l'Information, Editions´ Jacques Gabay, first published in the US in 1956 as \Science and Information Theory". Thomas M. Thompson, From Error-Correcting Codes Through Sphere Packings to Simple Groups", Mathematical Association of America, 1983. R. Hill, A First Course in Coding Theory", Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986. W Wesley Peterson and E. J. Weldon, Error-Correcting Codes, MIT
    [Show full text]
  • The Next Generation of Computing
    March 2021 Investment Case for QTUM: the Next Generation of Computing Quantum Computing (QC) describes the next generation of computing innovation, which could in turn support transformative scope and capacity changes in Machine Learning (ML). 1 March 2021 Investment Case for QTUM QC harnesses the peculiar properties of subatomic particles at sub-Kelvin temperatures to perform certain kinds of calculations exponentially faster than any traditional computer is capable of. They are not just faster than binary digital electronic (traditional) computers, they process information in a radically different manner and therefore have the potential to explore big data in ways that have not been possible until now. Innovation in QC is directly linked to developments in ML, which relies upon machines gathering, absorbing and optimizing vast amounts of data. Companies leading the research, development and commercialization of QC include Google, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Honeywell, IonQ, D-Wave and Regetti Computing. Governments, financial services companies, international retail firms and defense establishments have all joined tech giants IBM, Google and Microsoft in recognizing and investing in the potential of QC. While D-Wave offered the first commercially available QC in 2011, frontrunners have mainly concentrated on providing cloud access to their nascent QCs. IBM were the first to make available their 5 and then 20 and now 65 qubit QC in 2016 (a qubit is the basic unit of quantum information—the quantum version of the classical binary bit), in order to allow researchers to work collaboratively to advance a breakthrough in this cutting-edge field. IBM have since built a community of over 260,000 registered users, who run more than one billion actions every day on real hardware and simulators.
    [Show full text]