33 views

Uploaded by dcsi3

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Quantum Theory and the Brain.
- Computational Quantum Physics
- Quantum Computation
- 0106133v2
- Bob Coecke- Quantum information-flow, concretely, and axiomatically
- Intersubjective agreement in quantum-like experiment in biology
- The_Limits_of_Quantum_Computers.pdf
- 0-Th Quantization or Quantum (Information) Theory in 42 Minutes
- Non Free Electron Model
- 201601169
- Jacob D. Biamonte,Stephen R. Clark and Dieter Jaksch-Categorical Tensor Network States
- Andre Hirschowitz and Michel Hirschowitz- Towards a Notion of Truth for Linear Logic
- Samson Abramsky and Bob Coecke- A categorical semantics of quantum protocols
- Yves Lafont- From Proof-Nets to Interaction Nets
- William Edwards- Non-locality in Categorical Quantum Mechanics
- Abransky, Tzevelekos, Introduction to Categories and Categorical Logic
- Jurgen Fuchs- The graphical calculus for ribbon categories: Algebras, modules, Nakayama automorphisms
- The definition of a planar algebra
- Emily Peters- Constructing the extended Haagerup planar algebra
- Richard Han- A Construction of the “2221” Planar Algebra

You are on page 1of 152

Thorsten Altenkirch University of Nottingham based on joint work with Jonathan Grattage supported by EPSRC grant GR/S30818/01

Background

Background

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits.

Background

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits. Feynman: Can we exploit this fact to perform computations more efciently?

Background

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits. Feynman: Can we exploit this fact to perform computations more efciently? Shor: Factorisation in quantum polynomial time.

Background

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits. Feynman: Can we exploit this fact to perform computations more efciently? Shor: Factorisation in quantum polynomial time. Grover: Blind search in

Background

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits. Feynman: Can we exploit this fact to perform computations more efciently? Shor: Factorisation in quantum polynomial time. Grover: Blind search in

Background

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits. Feynman: Can we exploit this fact to perform computations more efciently? Shor: Factorisation in quantum polynomial time. Grover: Blind search in

yes

Simulation of quantum systems is expensive: PSPACE complexity for polynomial circuits. Feynman: Can we exploit this fact to perform computations more efciently? Shor: Factorisation in quantum polynomial time. Grover: Blind search in

yes no

Quantum algorithms are usually presented using the circuit model.

Quantum algorithms are usually presented using the circuit model. Nielsen and Chuang, p.7, Coming up with good quantum algorithms is hard.

Quantum algorithms are usually presented using the circuit model. Nielsen and Chuang, p.7, Coming up with good quantum algorithms is hard. Richard Josza, QPL 2004: We need to develop quantum thinking!

QML

QML

QML: a functional language for quantum computations on nite types.

QML

QML: a functional language for quantum computations on nite types. Quantum control and quantum data.

QML

QML: a functional language for quantum computations on nite types. Quantum control and quantum data. Design guided by semantics

QML

QML: a functional language for quantum computations on nite types. Quantum control and quantum data. Design guided by semantics Analogy with classical computation Finite classical computations Finite quantum computations

QML

QML: a functional language for quantum computations on nite types. Quantum control and quantum data. Design guided by semantics Analogy with classical computation Finite classical computations Finite quantum computations

QML

QML: a functional language for quantum computations on nite types. Quantum control and quantum data. Design guided by semantics Analogy with classical computation Finite classical computations Finite quantum computations

Matrix

QML

$ D %C $ ( )' 1 0 34%2 ( 5 9A @8 4 B 1 0 4%2 3 56 ( 7 9A @8 4 B ( )' &%" # $ !

Matrix

u g hf i rspq PR QI b GS t d g g y r g hf g y qx y

Tallinn Feb 06 p.6/44

FH GE

FH GE PR QI T US

d ec i uv g y r w y qx X

W XV W V

hf

Deutsch algorithm

` aY y g c y x i uv g g hf x y i g y qx b uv

X y

X y

Overview

1. Finite classical computation 2. Finite quantum computation 3. QML basics 4. Compiling QML 5. Conclusions and further work

1. Semantics

1. Finite classical computation 2. Finite quantum computation 3. QML basics 4. Compiling QML 5. Conclusions and further work

Start with classical computations on nite types.

Start with classical computations on nite types. Quantum mechanics is time-reversible. . .

Start with classical computations on nite types. Quantum mechanics is time-reversible. . . . . . hence quantum computation is based on reversible operations.

Start with classical computations on nite types. Quantum mechanics is time-reversible. . . . . . hence quantum computation is based on reversible operations. However: Newtonian mechanics, Maxwellian electrodynamics are also time-reversible. . .

Start with classical computations on nite types. Quantum mechanics is time-reversible. . . . . . hence quantum computation is based on reversible operations. However: Newtonian mechanics, Maxwellian electrodynamics are also time-reversible. . . . . . hence classical computation should be based on reversible operations.

Classical computation (

Classical computation (

Given nite sets (input) and

d

)

(output):

Classical computation (

Given nite sets (input) and

d

)

(output):

Classical computation (

Given nite sets (input) and

d

)

(output):

j ki

Classical computation (

Given nite sets (input) and

d

)

(output):

j ki

, ,

Classical computation (

Given nite sets (input) and

d

)

(output):

j

, , ,

,

l m l

j ki

d o

1 1

bb bb bbb b

n ! o

VV VV VVV 1

d o

1 1

bb bb bbb b

n ! o

VV VV VVV 1

Theorem: U U U

6 7 6 p 6 7 pq q 7

Extensional equality

Extensional equality

A classical computation induces a function U

q j l 6 q r r i

by

/

l

O

zx {yw |}

vut

Extensional equality

A classical computation induces a function U

q j l 6 q r r i

by

/

l

O

zx {yw |}

We say that two computations are extensionally equivalent, if they give rise to the same function.

vut

Extensional equality . . .

Theorem:

U U U

6 7 6 p 6 7 pq q 7

Extensional equality . . .

Theorem:

U U U

6 7 6 p 6 7 pq q 7

Hence, classical computations upto extensional equality give rise to the category .

Extensional equality . . .

Theorem:

U U U

6 7 6 p 6 7 pq q 7

Hence, classical computations upto extensional equality give rise to the category . Theorem: Any function on nite sets can be realized by a computation.

r j

Extensional equality . . .

Theorem:

U U U

6 7 6 p 6 7 pq q 7

Hence, classical computations upto extensional equality give rise to the category . Theorem: Any function on nite sets can be realized by a computation. Translation for Category Theoreticians: U is full and faithful.

r j

Example

function

~ j 6 ~ 6

:

7

7

Example

function

~ j 6 ~ 6

:

7

computation

1

e

Example :

function

j 6 6 r 7 r 7

function

computation

j 6 6 r 7 r 7

6 j 6 7 7 6 6 r r r 7 6

Example :

r 7 r 7 7

r

'!"# &%$

1. Finite classical computation 2. Finite quantum computation 3. QML basics 4. Compiling QML 5. Conclusions and further work

Given a nite set (the base) is a Hilbert space.

Given a nite set (the base) is a Hilbert space. Linear operators: induces we write

j j j

Given a nite set (the base) is a Hilbert space. Linear operators: induces we write Norm of a vector: ,

j j j 6 76 j 7

Given a nite set (the base) is a Hilbert space. Linear operators: induces . we write Norm of a vector: , Unitary operators: A unitary operator is a linear isounitary morphism that preserves the norm.

j j j 6 76 j j 7

A pure state over unit norm .

)

is a vector

with

A pure state over unit norm .

) j

is a vector

with

Quantum computations (

Quantum computations (

Given nite sets (input) and

e d

(output):

Quantum computations (

Given nite sets (input) and

e d

(output):

Quantum computations (

Given nite sets (input) and

e d

(output):

ji

Quantum computations (

Given nite sets (input) and

e d

(output):

ji

Quantum computations (

Given nite sets (input) and

e d

(output):

ji

a nite set , the base of the space of garbage states, a unitary operator

unitary

d o

1 1

bb bb bbb b

n ! o

VV VV VVV 1

. . . is a bit more subtle.

. . . is a bit more subtle. There is no (sensible) operator on vector spaces, replacing .

j ~ l

. . . is a bit more subtle. There is no (sensible) operator on vector spaces, replacing .

j ~ l

Density matrizes

Density matrizes

Mixed states can be represented by density matrizes .

j

Density matrizes

Mixed states can be represented by density matrizes .

j

System is in state

with prob.

Density matrizes

Mixed states can be represented by density matrizes .

j

System is in state

with prob.

EPR

j

is represented by

:

`

` `

EPR

j

is represented by

:

`

` ` 6 5 5 7 5 5

After measuring one qbit we obtain :

j ` `

After measuring one qbit we obtain :

j ` ` 5 5 5 5

Superoperators

Superoperators

Morphisms on density matrizes are called superoperators, these are linear maps, which are completely positive, and trace preserving

Superoperators

Morphisms on density matrizes are called superoperators, these are linear maps, which are completely positive, and trace preserving Every unitary operator superoperator .

gives rise to a

Superoperators. . .

There is an operator

98 j z

super

Superoperators. . .

There is an operator

98 j z

super

@8 9 j z

matrix.

super

is

Semantics

Semantics

Every quantum computation gives rise to a superoperator U super

q j q

O

| x

Semantics

Every quantum computation gives rise to a superoperator U super

q j q

O

| x

Theorem: Every superoperator super (on nite Hilbert spaces) comes from a quantum computation.

j

Classical vs quantum

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

nite sets

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

nite sets

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

bijections

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

bijections functions

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

bijections functions

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

w

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

nite dimensional Hilbert spaces tensor product ( ) unitary operators superoperators ) isometries ( )

w w

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

nite dimensional Hilbert spaces tensor product ( ) unitary operators superoperators ) isometries ( )

w w

Classical vs quantum

classical ( ) quantum ( )

nite dimensional Hilbert spaces tensor product ( ) unitary operators superoperators ) isometries ( )

w w

partial trace

Decoherence

Decoherence

'!"# &%$

e e

Decoherence

'!"# &%$

e ~ p e

Classically

Decoherence

'!"# &%$

e ~ p e

Classically Quantum

Decoherence

'!"# &%$

e ~ p B e

Classically Quantum

input:

'

5

Decoherence

'!"# &%$

e ~ p B B e

Classically Quantum

input:

'

output:

'5

'5

3. QML basics

1. Finite classical computation 2. Finite quantum computation 3. QML basics 4. Compiling QML 5. Conclusions and further work

QML basics

QML basics

QML is a rst order functional languages, i.e. programs are well-typed expressions.

QML basics

QML is a rst order functional languages, i.e. programs are well-typed expressions. QML types are

r r

QML basics

QML is a rst order functional languages, i.e. programs are well-typed expressions. QML types are Qbytes

r r

QML basics . . .

A QML program is an expression in a context of typed variables, e.g.

! $ &%" # D C ( 9A @8 4 $ $ ( 1 0 34 2

QML basics . . .

A QML program is an expression in a context of typed variables, e.g.

! $ &%" # D C (

We can compile QML programs into quantum computations (i.e. quantum circuits).

9A @8 4

1 0 34 2

QML basics . . .

Forgetting variables has to be explicit.

QML basics . . .

Forgetting variables has to be explicit. E.g.

6 7

is illegal,

QML basics . . .

Forgetting variables has to be explicit. E.g.

6 7

is illegal, but

6 7 '

is ok.

QML basics . . .

QML basics . . .

&%" # $ !

1 0 34%2

D C

9A @8 4 (

QML basics . . .

&%" # $ !

$ &%" #

1 0 34 2

D %C

9A @8 4 (

1 0 34%2

D C

9A @8 4 (

QML basics . . .

!

Using is only allowed, if the branches are orthogonal, i.e. observable different.

QML basics . . .

!

Using is only allowed, if the branches are orthogonal, i.e. observable different.

6 7 ! r 6 $ &%" # 6 r D C $ $

is illegal,

QML basics . . .

!

Using is only allowed, if the branches are orthogonal, i.e. observable different.

6 7 ! r 6 $ &%" # 6 r D C $ $

is illegal, but

6 6 7 ! r 6 6 $ &%" # 9A @8 4 ( 6 6 r r ( 1 0 34 2 D C $ $ r 7

is ok.

QML basics . . .

We can introduce superpositions, e.g.

! ( )'

56

( 7

&%" # $

1 0 34%2

( )'

( 5

1 0 34%2

D %C

9A @8 4

9A @8 4

QML basics . . .

We can introduce superpositions, e.g.

! ( )'

56

( 7

&%" # $

1 0 34%2

( )'

( 5

1 0 34%2

D %C

9A @8 4

9A @8 4

4. Compiling QML

1. Finite classical computation 2. Finite quantum computation 3. QML basics 4. Compiling QML 5. Conclusions and further work

Compilation

Compilation

Correct QML programs are dened by typing rules, e.g.

r r

Compilation

Correct QML programs are dened by typing rules, e.g.

r r

-elim

r

r 7

4 2

-elim

r r 6 7 2 4 r

YY YYY

1 1

YY YY YY

YY YY YY 1

Compiler

Compiler

A compiler is currently being implemented by my student Jonathan Grattage (in Haskell).

Compiler

A compiler is currently being implemented by my student Jonathan Grattage (in Haskell). The output of the compiler are quantum circuits which can be simulated by a quantum circuit simulator.

Compiler

A compiler is currently being implemented by my student Jonathan Grattage (in Haskell). The output of the compiler are quantum circuits which can be simulated by a quantum circuit simulator. Amr Sabry and Juliana Vizotti (Indiana University) embarked on an independent implementation of QML based on our paper.

5. Conclusions

1. Semantics of nite classical and quantum computation 2. QML basics 3. Compiling QML 4. Conclusions and further work

Conclusions

Conclusions

Our semantic ideas proved useful when designing a quantum programming language, analogous concepts are modelled by the same syntactic constructs.

Conclusions

Our semantic ideas proved useful when designing a quantum programming language, analogous concepts are modelled by the same syntactic constructs.

Our analysis also highlights the differences between classical and quantum programming.

Conclusions

Our semantic ideas proved useful when designing a quantum programming language, analogous concepts are modelled by the same syntactic constructs.

Our analysis also highlights the differences between classical and quantum programming. We have developed an algebra of quantum programs which for pure programs is complete wrt the semantics and a normalisation algorithm.

Conclusions

Our analysis also highlights the differences between classical and quantum programming. We have developed an algebra of quantum programs which for pure programs is complete wrt the semantics and a normalisation algorithm. Quantum programming introduces the problem of control of decoherence, which we address by making forgetting variables explicit and by having different if-then-else constructs.

Further work

Further work

We have to analyze more quantum programs to evaluate the practical usefulness of our approach.

Further work

We have to analyze more quantum programs to evaluate the practical usefulness of our approach.

We should be able to extend our algebra and normalisation to the full language (including measurements).

Further work

We have to analyze more quantum programs to evaluate the practical usefulness of our approach.

We should be able to extend our algebra and normalisation to the full language (including measurements). Are we able to come up with completely new algorithms using QML?

Further work

We have to analyze more quantum programs to evaluate the practical usefulness of our approach.

We should be able to extend our algebra and normalisation to the full language (including measurements). Are we able to come up with completely new algorithms using QML? How to deal with higher order programs?

Further work

We have to analyze more quantum programs to evaluate the practical usefulness of our approach.

We should be able to extend our algebra and normalisation to the full language (including measurements). Are we able to come up with completely new algorithms using QML? How to deal with higher order programs? How to deal with innite datatypes?

Further work

We have to analyze more quantum programs to evaluate the practical usefulness of our approach.

We should be able to extend our algebra and normalisation to the full language (including measurements). Are we able to come up with completely new algorithms using QML? How to deal with higher order programs? How to deal with innite datatypes? Investigate the similarities/differences between FCC and FQC from a categorical point of view.

Papers, available from //www.cs.nott.ac.uk/txa/publ/

A functional quantum programming language

LICS 2005

with J.Grattage

Structuring Quantum Effects: Superoperators as Arrows

An Algebra of Pure Quantum Programming

- Quantum Theory and the Brain.Uploaded by300r
- Computational Quantum PhysicsUploaded byv1rus12
- Quantum ComputationUploaded byputcallparity
- 0106133v2Uploaded byprblajr
- Intersubjective agreement in quantum-like experiment in biologyUploaded bySylvia Cheung
- The_Limits_of_Quantum_Computers.pdfUploaded bykebarcla
- 0-Th Quantization or Quantum (Information) Theory in 42 MinutesUploaded byrgkelly62
- Non Free Electron ModelUploaded byMuhammad Farhan
- 201601169Uploaded byKashyap Gohil

- Bob Coecke- Quantum information-flow, concretely, and axiomaticallyUploaded bydcsi3
- Jacob D. Biamonte,Stephen R. Clark and Dieter Jaksch-Categorical Tensor Network StatesUploaded bydcsi3
- Andre Hirschowitz and Michel Hirschowitz- Towards a Notion of Truth for Linear LogicUploaded bydcsi3
- Samson Abramsky and Bob Coecke- A categorical semantics of quantum protocolsUploaded bydcsi3
- Yves Lafont- From Proof-Nets to Interaction NetsUploaded bydcsi3
- William Edwards- Non-locality in Categorical Quantum MechanicsUploaded bydcsi3
- Abransky, Tzevelekos, Introduction to Categories and Categorical LogicUploaded byflores3831_814460512
- Jurgen Fuchs- The graphical calculus for ribbon categories: Algebras, modules, Nakayama automorphismsUploaded bydcsi3
- The definition of a planar algebraUploaded bydcsi3
- Emily Peters- Constructing the extended Haagerup planar algebraUploaded bydcsi3
- Richard Han- A Construction of the “2221” Planar AlgebraUploaded bydcsi3
- Vijay Kodiyalam and V.S. Sunder- On Jones' Planar AlgebrasUploaded bydcsi3
- V. F. R. Jones- Planar Algebras, IUploaded bydcsi3
- Ingo Runkel- Algebra in Braided Tensor Categories and Conformal Field TheoryUploaded bydcsi3
- Jurg Frohlich,Jurgen Fuchs,Ingo Runkel and Christoph Schweigert- Correspondance of Ribbon CategoriesUploaded bydcsi3
- Bob Coecke and Eric Oliver Paquette- Categories for the practising physicistUploaded bydcsi3
- Bob Coecke and Ross Duncan- Interacting Quantum ObservablesUploaded bydcsi3
- Spencer D. Stirling and Yong-Shi Wu- Braided Categorical Quantum Mechanics IUploaded bydcsi3
- John C. Baez- Quantum Quandaries: A Category-Theoretic PerspectiveUploaded bydcsi3
- John C. Baez and Aaeon Lauda- A Prehistory of n-Categorical PhysicsUploaded bydcsi3
- Samuel J. Lomonaco and Louis H. Kauffman- Quantum Knots and MosaicsUploaded bydcsi3
- Jeffrey C. Morton- Groupoidification in PhysicsUploaded bydcsi3
- Louis H. Kauffman- Spin Networks and the Bracket PolynomialUploaded bydcsi3
- Bob Coecke- Kindergarten Quantum MechanicsUploaded bydcsi3
- Jacob Biamonte- Categorical Models of Quantum CircuitsUploaded bydcsi3
- Ville Bergholm and Jacob D. Biamonte- Categorical Quantum CircuitsUploaded bydcsi3
- Ville Bergholm and Jacob D. Biamonte- Categorical Quantum CircuitsUploaded bydcsi3
- Jacob Biamonte- Quantum versus Classical Network Structure and FunctionUploaded bydcsi3
- Roger Penrose- Applications of Negative Dimensional TensorsUploaded bydcsi3
- Bob Coecke- Quantum PicturalismUploaded bydcsi3

- Notes Ten Sores and RelativityUploaded byVivek Chaurasia
- chapter-1Uploaded byCannot Sleep
- Checklist Ch 07Uploaded bymoyashisoftware
- Cross SectionUploaded bycornejo240
- Fano - Description of States in Qunatum Mechanics by Density Matrix and OperatorsUploaded byAlex
- SchrödingerUploaded byviska
- 6299894 Godel Meets EinsteinUploaded bycenturionc
- Quantum Numbers and Electron ConfigurationsUploaded byAbinesh Tr
- Niels Bohr’s Interpretation and the Copenhagen Interpretation—Are the Two Incompatible.pdfUploaded byIgor Vogel
- sfsfefeUploaded bySean Sun
- motionmountain-volume6Uploaded bySherif Antonios
- Ettore MajoranaUploaded bysamarkayta
- 01. Modern Physics_Theory_Final SettingUploaded byraja
- albert einsteinUploaded bynitinnair15
- 07 atomic structure and periodicityUploaded byapi-287405319
- Lecture9 Helicity and ChiralityUploaded byEric Kumi Barimah
- Lewis Theory of BondingUploaded byJulianne Marie Lacsento
- 103344Uploaded byMASIZKA
- Holographic Duality in Condensed Matter PhysicsUploaded byKonstantinos Ladovrechis
- Nuclear and Particle Physics_GATE 2010-2017Uploaded byVikalp Pratap Singh
- Cavity Opto-mechanics - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaUploaded byNeha Anis
- p660Uploaded byLouis
- Computational NanoscienceUploaded byDeni Haryadi
- notes_EFTUploaded byIberê Souza
- Mini Lec on Black HolesUploaded byZoë Hunter Gordon
- MODULE 4.5 Quantum PhysicsUploaded byanjujobby
- Yang-Mills theory on the Light ConeUploaded bys4suchi
- Force TypesUploaded bySarvesh Jaiswal
- Special Theory of Relativity & the Lorentz ForceUploaded bysiege
- Physics_ What We Do and Don’t Know by Steven Weinberg _ The New York Review of BooksUploaded byVesco Paskalev