Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
stub for quantum computation
I was convinced that John had discussed this as one of the topics planned for Azimuth Project, but my search did not find any directly related entry there, maybe John wrote about it elsewhere ? To some extent it s related to
which I will quote in the entry. The first ideas on quantum computing were due a paper of Feynman I think, but can not search for it now.
I have added to the references at quantum computation and at monad (in computer science) and at functional programming a pointer to
added this reference here to quantum computation
and slightly re-arranged and briefly commented on the items in the list of references
(all still very stubby)
added to quantum computation an explicit pointer to the article
which argues explicitly that linear (modal) logic is a good formalization of quantum compuation.
But I need to stare at that article a bit more to get a better idea of what their modality does. Adding qbits? I am not sure if I got the point here.
added this pointer:
added this more recent review:
[ah, wrong entry, moved now to topological quantum computing]
added this more recent survey:
Added a bunch of very recent reviews:
Quantum Computing Review Q4 2020, IDQ January 2021
Jiajun Chen, Review on Quantum Communication and Quantum Computation, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Volume 1865, 2021 International Conference on Advances in Optics and Computational Sciences (ICAOCS) 2021 21-23 January 2021, Ottawa, Canada (doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1865/2/022008)
David Matthews, How to get started in quantum computing, Nature 591 March 2021 (nature:d41586-021-00533-x, pdf)
Christine Middleton, What’s under the hood of a quantum computer?, Physics Today, March 2021 (doi:10.1063/PT.6.1.20210305a)
and some still fairly recent:
Qiang Zhang, Feihu Xu, Li Li, Nai-Le Liu, Jian-Wei Pan, Quantum information research in China, Quantum Sci. Technol. 4 040503 (doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab4bea)
Farzan Jazaeri, Arnout Beckers, Armin Tajalli, Jean-Michel Sallese, A Review on Quantum Computing: Qubits, Cryogenic Electronics and Cryogenic MOSFET Physics (arXiv:1908.02656)
added the pointers to claims of realizing quantum supremacy:
F. Arute et al. Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature 574 (2019) 505–510 (doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5)
Han-Sen Zhong et al. , Quantum computational advantage using photons, Science 370 6523 (2020) 1460-1463 (doi:10.1126/science.abe8770 )
and some review:
Adrian Cho, Google claims quantum computing milestone, Science 365 6460 (2019) 1364 (doi:10.1126/science.365.6460.1364)
Philip Ball, Physicists in China challenge Google’s “quantum advantage”, Nature 588 380 (2020) (doi:10.1038/d41586-020-03434-7)
added pointer to:
Ranee K. Brylinski, Goong Chen (eds.), Mathematics of Quantum Computation, Chapman and Hall/CRC 2002 (doi:10.1201/9781420035377)
Louis Kauffman, Samuel J. Lomonaco, Mathematics of Quantum Computation and Quantum Technology, Chapman and Hall/CRC (2007) (ISBN:9780367388614, doi:10.1201/9781584889007)
added pointer to today’s
added pointer to today’s
(Am adding this also at quantum information)
added pointer to
(will also add this at Shor’s algorithm)
also added pointer to:
added pointer to this textbook:
added pointer to:
Noteworthy on p. 4:
Categorical language is appropriate to this end.
Can anyone help with Yuri Manin’s original 1980 article on quantum computing?
Wikipedia references this in the weirdest way (here): via a pointer to the WaybackMachine which then points to a zip-file which finally contains a djvu-scan of Manin’s actual book.
This seems a shame. I might make a pdf-copy of the file now and directly save it to the nLab server.
But if anyone knows that/where Manin’s book may be hosted online (maybe on some Russian site which English Google queries won’t detect) please let me know.
Have now referenced it as follows (here):
with this quote (which, apart from the preceding paragraph on RNA copying etc., seems to be the gist of it):
Perhaps, for a better understanding of [molecular biology], we need a mathematical theory of quantum automata.
added pointer to:
added these pointers:
Eleanor Rieffel, Wolfgang Polak, Quantum Computing – A gentle introduction, MIT Press (2011) [ISBN:9780262526678, pdf]
Eleanor Rieffel, Wolfgang Polak, An Introduction to Quantum Computing for Non-Physicists, ACM Comput. Surveys 32 (2000) 300-335 [arXiv:quant-ph/9809016, doi:10.1145/367701.367709]
In the graphics (here) showing the SQRAM model of Nagarajan, Papanikolaou & Williams (2007), Fig. 1 I have highlighted in purple the process which the Quipper community calls dynamic lifting (will give this its own little page now)
added pointer to:
added pointer to:
added pointer to this recent preprint:
Olivier Ezratty, Where are we heading with NISQ? [arXiv:2305.09518]
“no one has yet successfully implemented a use case matching the original definition of the NISQ regime.”
added pointer to:
added pointer to:
added pointer to:
added pointer to:
added pointer to today’s
added pointer to:
In fact, languages for classically controlled quantum computation should be based on dependent linear type theory (Vakar 14, Vakar 15, Vakar 17, Sec. 3, Lundfall 17, Lundfall 18, following Schreiber 14) with categorical semantics in indexed monoidal categories:
Worth adding something here on tangent -toposes?
Right now busy preparing talk notes which touch on this (but aimed at a “quantum matter”-audience far remote from topos theory): here.
That’s an interesting way to put things:
What makes this work, semantically, is a deep surprising theorem in modern algebraic topology which roughly says – echoing Bohr’s famous standpoint:
Topological quantum logic, when parameterized, becomes a form of classical logic.
Yes, it’s noteworthy. I had first tried to verbalize this on top of p. 5 of the Quantum Monadology, but there is room left to say it in more relatable terms.
One of the participant type-theorists of RunningHoTT
a few weeks ago quite picked up this point of how this approach allows to keep all of classical type-theorist’s tools in place and build on them in order to do quantum, instead of needing to start from scratch (cf. p. 2 of Mitchell’s slides, despite their terseness).
1 to 42 of 42