Certainty and uncertainty in quantum information processing

AAAI Spring Symposium - Technical Report

Volumn SS-07-08, Issue , 2007, Pages 134-141

  Rieffel, Eleanor G ^a  

^a FX PALO ALTO LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

QUANTUM ALGORITHMS; QUANTUM LEARNING;

ALGORITHMS; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS; QUANTUM THEORY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 37349029689     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (53)

1. Aaronson, S. 2005a. Are quantum states exponentially long vectors? quant-ph/0507242.
2. Aaronson, S. 2005b. Quantum computing, postselection, and probabilistic polynomial-time. Proceedings of the Royal Society A 461:3473-3482.
3. Aharonov, D.; van Dam, W.; Kempe, J.; Landau, Z.; Lloyd, S.; and Regev, O. 2004. Adiabatic quantum computation is equivalent to standard quantum computation. /quant-ph/0405098.
4. Aharonov, D.; Landau, Z.; and Makowsky, J. 2006. The quantum FFT can be classically simulated. Los Alamos Physics Preprint Archive, http : / /xxx.lanl.gov/ abs/quant-ph/0611156.
5. Ambainis, A. 2000. Quantum lower bounds by quantum arguments. In STOC '00: Proceedings of the thirtysecond annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, 636-643.
6. Atici, A., and Servedio, R. 2005. Improved bounds on quantum learning algorithms. Quantum Information Processing 4(5):355-386.
7. Beals, R.; Buhrman, H.; Cleve, R.; Mosca, M.; and de Wolf, R. 2001. Quantum lower bounds by polynomials. J. ACM 48(4) :778-797.
8. Bennett, C. H.; Bernstein, E.; Brassard, G.; and Vazirani, U. V. 1997. Strengths and weaknesses of quantum computing. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Journal on Computing 26(5): 1510-1523.
9. Bennett, C. H. 1989. Time/space trade-offs for reversible computation. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Journal on Computing 18(4):766-776.
10. Brassard, G.; Høyer, P.; and Tapp, A. 1998. Quantum counting. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1443:820 -831.
11. Bruss, D. 2002. Characterizing entanglement. Journal of Mathematical Physics 43(9):4237-4250.
12. Bshouty, N. H., and Jackson, J. C. 1999. Learning DNF over the uniform distribution using a quantum example oracle. SIAM Journal on Computing 28:1136-1142.
13. Buhrman, H., and Špalek, R. 2006. Quantum verification of matrix products. In Proc. of 17th ACM-SIAM SODA, 880-889.
14. Childs, A. M.; Cleve, R.; Deotto, E.; Farhi, E.; Gutmann, S.; and Spielman, D. A. 2002. Exponential algorithmic speedup by quantum walk, quant-ph/0209131.
15. Childs, A. M.; Landahl, A. J.; and Parrilo, B. A. 2006. Improved quantum algorithms for the ordered search problem viasemidefiniteprogramming, quant-ph/0608161.
16. Cohen, L. 1995. Time-frequency analysis. Prentice Hall.
17. Deutsch, D., and Jozsa, R. 1992. Rapid solution of problems by quantum computation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Ser. A A439:553-558.
18. Deutsch, D. 1985. Quantum theory, the Church-Turing principle and the universal quantum computer. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Ser. A A400:97-117.
19. Deutsch, D. 1998. David Deutsch's many worlds. Frontiers.
20. Dür, W.; Vidal, G.; and Cirac, J. I. 2000. Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways. Physical Review A 62.
21. Einstein, A.; Podolsky, B.; and Rosen, N. 1935. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review 47:777 - 780.
22. Gortler, S., and Servedio, R. 2004. Equivalences and separations between quantum and classical learnability. SIAM Journal on Computing 33(5): 1067-1092.
23. Greenberger, D. M.; Home, M. A.; Shimony, A.; and Zeilinger, A. 1990. A Bell's theorem without inequalities. American Journal of Physics 58:1131-1143.
24. Greenberger, D. M.; Home, M. A.; and Zeilinger, A. 1989. Going beyond Bell's theorem. In Bell's Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe. Kluwer. 73-76.
25. Grover, L. K. 1997. Quantum computers can search arbitrarily large databases by a single query. Physical Review Letters 79(23):4709-4712.
26. Hallgren, S. 2002. The hidden subgroup problem and quantum computation using group representations. STOC.
27. Harel, D. 1987. Algorithmics: The spirit of computing. Addison-Wesley.
28. Hunziker, M.; Meyer, D. A.; Park, J.; Pommersheim, J.; and Rothstein, M. 2003. The geometry of quantum learning. quant-ph/0309059.
29. Jozsa, R., and Linden, N. 2003. On the role of entanglement in quantum computational speed-up. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Ser. A 459:2011-2032.
30. Kitaev, A. Y.; Shen, A. H.; and Vyalyi, M. N. 2002. Classical and Quantum Computation. American Mathematical Society.
31. Knill, E. 1995. Approximation by quantum circuits. quant-ph/9508006.
32. Krovi, H., and Brun, T. A. 2007. Quantum walks on quotient graphs. quant-ph/0701173.
33. Kuperberg, G. 2005. A concise introduction to quantum probability, quantum mechanics, and quantum computation, unpublished notes.
34. Mackey, G. W. 1963. Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics. W. A. Benjamin, Inc.
35. Magniez, F., and Nayak, A. 2005. Quantum complexity of testing group commutativity. ICALP.
36. Magniez, F.; Santha, M.; and Szegedy, M. 2005. Quantum algorithms for the triangle problem. Proc. SODA.
37. Markov, I., and Shi, Y. 2005. Simulating quantum computation by contracting tensor networks, quant-ph/ 0511069.
38. Meyer, D. A. 2000. Sophisticated quantum search without entanglement. Physical Review Letters 85:2014-2017.
39. Nielsen, M., and Chuang, I. 2001. Quantum Computing and Quantum Information. Cambridge Press.
40. Nielsen, M. A. 2005. Cluster-state quantum computation. quant-ph/0504097.
41. Pan, J.; Bouwmeester, D.; Daniell, M.; Weinfurter, H.; and Zeilinger, A. 2000. Experimental test of quantum nonlocality in three-photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger entanglement. Nature 403:515-518.
42. Raussendorf, R.; Browne, D. E.; and Briegel, H. J. 2003. Measurement-based quantum computation with cluster states. Physical Review A 68:022312.
43. Redei, M., and Summers, S. J. 2006. Quantum probability theory, /hep-th/0601158.
44. Regev, O. 2005. On lattices, learning with errors, random linear codes, and cryptography. In Proc. 37th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing (STOC), 84-93.
45. Rieffel, E. G., and Polak, W. 2000. An introduction to quantum computing for non-physicists. ACM Computing Surveys 32(3):300 -335.
46. Rieffel, E. G., and Polak, W. in preparation. A Gentle Introduction to Quantum Computing. MIT Press.
47. Servedio, R. A. 2001. Separating quantum and classical learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2076:1065-1080.
48. Strocchi, F. 2005. An Introduction to the Mathematical Structure of Quantum Mechanics. World Scientific.
49. Sudbery, A. 1986. Quantum Mechanics and the Particles of Nature. Cambridge University Press.
50. Traub, J., and Werschulz, A. G. 1999. Complexity and Information. Cambridge University Press.
51. van Dam, W.; Hallgren, S.; and Ip, L. 2003. Quantum algorithms for some hidden shift problems. In SODA '03: Proceedings of the fourteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms, 489-498.
52. Vidal, G. 2003. Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations. Physical Review Letters 91:147902.
53. Watrous, J. 2001. Quantum algorithms for solvable groups. STOC 60 -67.