Lecture8:Data Manipulation in SQL Advanced SQL queries Ref. Chapter5 Lecture8 1.
Lecture8 Dan Simon
description
Transcript of Lecture8 Dan Simon
Quantum Computation for Dummies
Dan Simon
Microsoft Research
UW students
The Strong Church-Turing Thesis
• Church-Turing Thesis: Any physically realizable computing machine can be modeled by a Turing Machine (TM)– A statement about the physical world
• Strong Church-Turing Thesis: Any physically realizable computing machine can be modeled by a polynomial-time probabilistic TM (PPTM)– A physical/economic statement of sorts
Consequences of the Thesis
• Some problems just cannot be efficiently solved by real, physical computing machines
• Suspected example: NP-complete problems – NP: Class of problems with polynomial-time
checkable solutions– NP-complete problems: If these are efficiently
solvable, then all NP problems are• Many practical examples, esp. in optimization; e.g., TSP
Challenges to the Thesis
• Moore’s Law: Fageddaboudit– It’s just a matter of time….
• Parallelism: Only a polynomial factor– Like speed, it eventually hits a wall
• Analog: Precision is the catch– Precision is (eventually) as costly as speed
• Chaos: Ditto
“You have nothing to do but mention the quantum theory, and people will take your voice for the voice of science, and believe anything.”
--George Bernard Shaw, Geneva (1938)
Enter Quantum Mechanics…
History
• Benioff (1981): Quantum systems can simulate TM
• Feynman (1982): Can they do more? It appears possible....
• Deutsch (1985): Formalized Quantum TM (QTM) model, constructed an (inefficient) universal QTM (UQTM)
BQP BPPA A
More History
• Deutsch & Jozsa (1992): exponential oracle separation of P (deterministic only) and QP– “promise problem” oracle
• Bernstein & Vazirani, Yao (1993): – efficient UQTM– Equivalence of quantum circuits and QTMs – Superpolynomial oracle separation of BPP
(probabilistic P) and BQP
The Breakthroughs
• Shor (1994): integer factoring, discrete log in BQP
• Grover (1995): General Search in timen
Classical Probabilistic Coin flips
H
H
H
T
T T
H
1/2 1/2
1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4
Probability vs. Amplitude
• Classical probability is a 1-norm– The probability of an event is just the sum of the
probabilities of the paths leading to it
– All the probabilities (for all events) must sum to 1
• In the quantum world, it becomes a 2-norm– Each path has an amplitude
– The amplitude of an event is the sum of the amplitudes of the paths leading to it
– Probability = |Amplitude|2 (for each event)
– All the probabilities (for all events) must (still) sum to 1
Interference
• Amplitudes can be negative (even complex!) and still preserve positive probability
• Different paths can thus “cancel” (negatively interfere with) or “reinforce” (positively interfere with) each other
• Paths are therefore no longer independent– we must consider the entire parallel collection
(superposition) of paths at any given point
Quantum Coin Flips
H
H
H
T
T T
H
2/1 2/1
1/2 1/2 1/2 -1/2
= 0= 1
Another Consequence of Amplitude
• Probabilistic processes (e.g., computation) can be represented by Markov chains (stochastic matrices--to preserve 1-norm)
• Quantum processes are represented by unitary matrices (M-1 = M*) to preserve 2-norm
• Unitary matrices have unitary inverses– hence quantum processes are always reversible– fortunately, that doesn’t exclude classical computing
Stochastic vs. Unitary
• Stochastic:– Rows, columns, sum to 1
(1-norm)
• Unitary:– Squared magnitudes in rows,
columns sum to 1 (2-norm)
– Inverse = Conjugate Transpose (also unitary)
2/12/1
2/12/1
2/12/1
2/12/1
Reversible Computation
• A function is reversibly computable if each step can be computed from the one before it or from the one after it
• Any computable function can be made reversibly computable (at a constant factor cost) if the input is preserved (i.e., the output on input x is (x,f(x)))– Use reversible gates (e.g., Toffoli gates)
– Preserve “work” at each step, then recompute to “clean up”
Exploiting Quantum Effects
• Idea: when searching for needle in haystack…
• ...Just follow all paths by flipping quantum coins, and make the dead ends disappear with negative interference!
• The catch: you must preserve unitarity…– e.g., use Toffoli gates for all your classical
computation, to make it reversible– ….but what else can you do?
A Simple Trick
H T
H
Tag Tag
HH T T2/1 2/1
1/2 1/2 1/2 -1/2
Tag Tag Tag Tag
Coherence
• An “event” can specify the states of multiple objects (coin + tag, multiple coins)
• Multiple paths interfere only if they lead to exactly the same event
• Objects must stay “coherent” for this to work– Superposition must be maintained– In particular, observation destroys coherence– That still permits, e.g., (reversible) computation
A Simple Trick (2)
H T
H
Tag Tag
2/1 2/1
HH T T1/2 1/2 1/2 -1/2
Tag Tag Tag Tag
A Slightly Less Simple Trick
0
0 ...... ... n-1Tag Tag
0 ... n-1 ... 0 ... n-1Tag Tag Tag Tag
Tag ...
[...]2 ie [...]2 ie [...]2 ie [...]2 ie
Shor’s Algorithm for Dummies
• Events with the same tag interfere negatively (i.e., cancel) unless their value “complements” the periodicity of the tags
• Seeing such “complementing” event values reveals the tags’ (possibly unknown) period…
• …Which corresponds to the order of an element in the multiplicative group mod n
• That’s enough information to factor n
Limitations
• The Church-Turing thesis is unaffected (QM is computable--in PSPACE, even)
• Some indication that NP may not be in BQP– Algorithm would have to be “non-relativizing”
• Known methods haven’t (yet) extended to some natural, ostensibly similar problems– Graph isomorphism– Lattice problems
Obstacles
• Getting those funny amplitudes just right – Precision on the quantum scale is required
• Keeping them just right – Error correcting codes needed ([Shor et al.])
• Preventing decoherence– Manipulation and coherence are at cross-purposes– Computing mechanisms themselves may
encourage decoherence
Implementation?
• Various proposals – particle spins, energy states to represent bits
• Best so far: NMR-based implementation of Grover’s search on 4-item “database”– Unlikely to scale well
• Unknown if any implementation can scale well– Practical limits of coherence are still a mystery