Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2006.16817

Proof of monotonic increase in the cost function for Krotov algorithm for open quantum systems

Tejas Shetty

Published Jun 29, 2020• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A great number of quantum control papers have used one of the variants of the monotonically convergent variational control algorithm of Krotov (as described in Maday and Turinici (2003), Tannor et al. (1992), Zhu and Rabitz (1998), etc). The paper "Speeding up Thermalisation via Open Quantum System Variational Optimisation" by N, Suri, et al. [EPJST 227, 203 -216 (2018), arXiv:1711.08776] provides us a way of carrying out Krotov algorithm for open quantum systems. We shall prove the Theorem 1 of the paper, greatly expanding upon the brief treatment given in appendix 1 of the same.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2006.16817

Related papers

Convergence of the time-discretized monotonic schemes

Julien Salomon

Many numerical simulations in (bilinear) quantum control use the monotonically convergent Krotov algorithms (introduced by Tannor et al. [Time Dependent Quantum Molecular Dynamics (1992) 347–360]), Zhu and Rabitz [J. Chem. Phys. (1998) 385–391] or their unified form described in Maday and Turinici [J. Chem. Phys. (2003) 8191–8196]. In Maday et al. [Num. Math. (2006) 323–338], a time discretization which preserves the property of monotonicity has been presented. This paper introduces a proof of the convergence of these schemes and some results regarding their rate of convergence.

ESAIM Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis•Jan 1, 2007•20 citations

Limit points the monotonic schemes for quantum control

Julien Salomon

Many numerical simulations in quantum (bilinear) control use the monotonically convergent algorithms of Krotov (introduced by Tannor in [12]), Zhu & Rabitz ([11]) or the general form of Maday & Turinici ([13]). This paper presents an analysis of the limit set of controls provided by these algorithms and a proof of convergence in a particular case.

arXiv:quant-ph/0503072•IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)•Oct 4, 2006•6 citations

Monotonically convergent optimization in quantum control using Krotov's method

Daniel M. Reich, Mamadou Ndong, Christiane P. Koch

The non-linear optimization method developed by A. Konnov and V. Krotov [Autom. Remote Cont. (Engl. Transl.) 60, 1427 (1999)] has been used previously to extend the capabilities of optimal control theory from the linear to the non-linear Schrödinger equation [S. E. Sklarz and D. J. Tannor, Phys. Rev. A 66, 053619 (2002)]. Here we show that based on the Konnov-Krotov method, monotonically convergent algorithms are obtained for a large class of quantum control problems. It includes, in addition to nonlinear equations of motion, control problems that are characterized by non-unitary time evolution, nonlinear dependencies of the Hamiltonian on the control, time-dependent targets, and optimization functionals that depend to higher than second order on the time-evolving states. We furthermore show that the nonlinear (second order) contribution can be estimated either analytically or numerically, yielding readily applicable optimization algorithms. We demonstrate monotonic convergence for an optimization functional that is an eighth-degree polynomial in the states. For the "standard" quantum control problem of a convex final-time functional, linear equations of motion and linear dependency of the Hamiltonian on the field, the second-order contribution is not required for monotonic convergence but can be used to speed up convergence. We demonstrate this by comparing the performance of first- and second-order algorithms for two examples.

arXiv:1008.5126•The Journal of Chemical Physics•Mar 9, 2012•219 citations

Krotov Method in Optimal Quantum Control. I. Closed Systems

Oleg Vasilevich Morzhin, Alexander Nikolaevich Pechen

Mathematical problems of optimal control of quantum systems attract high interest in connection with both fundamental questions and existing and prospective applications. An important problem is the development of methods for constructing controls for quantum systems. One of the widely used methods is the Krotov method. The article is the first part of the review devoted to mathematical aspects of this method for optimal control of quantum systems. Beyond quantum control this method was suggested in the articles [V.F. Krotov, I.N. Feldman, Eng. Cybern. 1983. Vol. 21, 123], [A.I. Konnov, V.F. Krotov, Automat. Remote Control, 1999], and then adopted to optimal quantum control in papers by V.A. Kazakov, V.F. Krotov, R. Kosloff, C.P. Koch, D.J. Tannor, and others. The review considers this method, including cases with constraints on control spectrum and on states of the quantum system, various ways for choosing the improvement function, in particular, linear or linear-quadratic form, etc. We also discuss GRAPE (GRadient Ascent Pulse Engineering) and CRAB (Chopped Random-Basis) methods, as well as combined methods such as the method suggested by I. Maday and G. Turinici for generalizing the 1st order Krotov method and the Zhu-Rabitz method. Nowadays, various versions of the Krotov method are used as a key tool in optimal quantum control, and the review describes applications of this method to mathematical control problems for molecular dynamics, Bose-Einstein condensate, nuclear-magnetic resonance, quantum gates generation, etc. The first part of the review is devoted to closed quantum systems.

•Sep 25, 2018•0 citations

Krotov method for optimal control of closed quantum systems

Oleg Vasilevich Morzhin, Alexander Nikolaevich Pechen

Abstract The mathematics of optimal control of quantum systems is of great interest in connection with fundamental problems of physics as well as with existing and prospective applications to quantum technologies. One important problem is the development of methods for constructing controls for quantum systems. One of the commonly used methods is the Krotov method, which was initially proposed outside of quantum control theory in articles by Krotov and Feldman (1978, 1983). This method was used to develop a novel approach to finding optimal controls for quantum systems in [64] (Tannor, Kazakov, and Orlov, 1992), [65] (Somlói, Kazakov, and Tannor, 1993), and in many other works by various scientists. Our survey discusses mathematical aspects of this method for optimal control of closed quantum systems. It outlines various modifications with different forms of the improvement function (for example, linear or linear-quadratic), different constraints on the control spectrum and on the admissible states of the quantum system, different regularisers, and so on. The survey describes applications of the Krotov method to controlling molecular dynamics and Bose–Einstein condensates, and to quantum gate generation. This method is compared with the GRAPE (GRadient Ascent Pulse Engineering) method, the CRAB (Chopped Random-Basis) method, and the Zhu–Rabitz and Maday–Turinici methods. Bibliography: 158 titles.

arXiv:1809.09562•Russian Mathematical Surveys•Oct 1, 2019•52 citations

New formulations of monotonically convergent quantum control algorithms

Yvon Maday, Gabriel Turinici

Most of the numerical simulation in quantum (bilinear) control have used one of the monotonically convergent algorithms of Krotov (introduced by Tannor et al.) or of Zhu and Rabitz. However, until now no explicit relationship has been revealed between the two algorithms in order to understand their common properties. Within this framework, we propose in this paper a unified formulation that comprises both algorithms and that extends to a new class of monotonically convergent algorithms. Numerical results show that the newly derived algorithms behave as well as (and sometimes better than) the well-known algorithms cited above.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Apr 23, 2003•193 citations
A great number of quantum control papers have used one of the variants of the monotonically convergent variational control algorithm of Krotov (as described in Maday and Turinici (2003), Tannor et al. (1992), Zhu and Rabitz (1998), etc). The paper "Speeding up Thermalisation via Open Quantum System Variational Optimisation" by N, Suri, et al. [EPJST 227, 203 -216 (2018), arXiv:1711.08776] provides us a way of carrying out Krotov algorithm for open quantum systems. We shall prove the Theorem 1 of the paper, greatly expanding upon the brief treatment given in appendix 1 of the same.
Many numerical simulations in (bilinear) quantum control use the monotonically convergent Krotov algorithms (introduced by Tannor et al. [Time Dependent Quantum Molecular Dynamics (1992) 347–360]), Zhu and Rabitz [J. Chem. Phys. (1998) 385–391] or their unified form described in Maday and Turinici [J. Chem. Phys. (2003) 8191–8196]. In Maday et al. [Num. Math. (2006) 323–338], a time discretization which preserves the property of monotonicity has been presented. This paper introduces a proof of the convergence of these schemes and some results regarding their rate of convergence.
The non-linear optimization method developed by A. Konnov and V. Krotov [Autom. Remote Cont. (Engl. Transl.) 60, 1427 (1999)] has been used previously to extend the capabilities of optimal control theory from the linear to the non-linear Schrödinger equation [S. E. Sklarz and D. J. Tannor, Phys. Rev. A 66, 053619 (2002)]. Here we show that based on the Konnov-Krotov method, monotonically convergent algorithms are obtained for a large class of quantum control problems. It includes, in addition to nonlinear equations of motion, control problems that are characterized by non-unitary time evolution, nonlinear dependencies of the Hamiltonian on the control, time-dependent targets, and optimization functionals that depend to higher than second order on the time-evolving states. We furthermore show that the nonlinear (second order) contribution can be estimated either analytically or numerically, yielding readily applicable optimization algorithms. We demonstrate monotonic convergence for an optimization functional that is an eighth-degree polynomial in the states. For the "standard" quantum control problem of a convex final-time functional, linear equations of motion and linear dependency of the Hamiltonian on the field, the second-order contribution is not required for monotonic convergence but can be used to speed up convergence. We demonstrate this by comparing the performance of first- and second-order algorithms for two examples.
Mathematical problems of optimal control of quantum systems attract high interest in connection with both fundamental questions and existing and prospective applications. An important problem is the development of methods for constructing controls for quantum systems. One of the widely used methods is the Krotov method. The article is the first part of the review devoted to mathematical aspects of this method for optimal control of quantum systems. Beyond quantum control this method was suggested in the articles [V.F. Krotov, I.N. Feldman, Eng. Cybern. 1983. Vol. 21, 123], [A.I. Konnov, V.F. Krotov, Automat. Remote Control, 1999], and then adopted to optimal quantum control in papers by V.A. Kazakov, V.F. Krotov, R. Kosloff, C.P. Koch, D.J. Tannor, and others. The review considers this method, including cases with constraints on control spectrum and on states of the quantum system, various ways for choosing the improvement function, in particular, linear or linear-quadratic form, etc. We also discuss GRAPE (GRadient Ascent Pulse Engineering) and CRAB (Chopped Random-Basis) methods, as well as combined methods such as the method suggested by I. Maday and G. Turinici for generalizing the 1st order Krotov method and the Zhu-Rabitz method. Nowadays, various versions of the Krotov method are used as a key tool in optimal quantum control, and the review describes applications of this method to mathematical control problems for molecular dynamics, Bose-Einstein condensate, nuclear-magnetic resonance, quantum gates generation, etc. The first part of the review is devoted to closed quantum systems.
Abstract The mathematics of optimal control of quantum systems is of great interest in connection with fundamental problems of physics as well as with existing and prospective applications to quantum technologies. One important problem is the development of methods for constructing controls for quantum systems. One of the commonly used methods is the Krotov method, which was initially proposed outside of quantum control theory in articles by Krotov and Feldman (1978, 1983). This method was used to develop a novel approach to finding optimal controls for quantum systems in [64] (Tannor, Kazakov, and Orlov, 1992), [65] (Somlói, Kazakov, and Tannor, 1993), and in many other works by various scientists. Our survey discusses mathematical aspects of this method for optimal control of closed quantum systems. It outlines various modifications with different forms of the improvement function (for example, linear or linear-quadratic), different constraints on the control spectrum and on the admissible states of the quantum system, different regularisers, and so on. The survey describes applications of the Krotov method to controlling molecular dynamics and Bose–Einstein condensates, and to quantum gate generation. This method is compared with the GRAPE (GRadient Ascent Pulse Engineering) method, the CRAB (Chopped Random-Basis) method, and the Zhu–Rabitz and Maday–Turinici methods. Bibliography: 158 titles.
Most of the numerical simulation in quantum (bilinear) control have used one of the monotonically convergent algorithms of Krotov (introduced by Tannor et al.) or of Zhu and Rabitz. However, until now no explicit relationship has been revealed between the two algorithms in order to understand their common properties. Within this framework, we propose in this paper a unified formulation that comprises both algorithms and that extends to a new class of monotonically convergent algorithms. Numerical results show that the newly derived algorithms behave as well as (and sometimes better than) the well-known algorithms cited above.