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

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE

On classical stimulation of quantum machines

Farid Mansurovich Ablayev, Aida Gainutdinova

Published Jun 1, 2005• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

We present a classical probabilistic simulation technique of quantum Turing machines As a corollary of this technique we obtain several results on relationship among classical and quantum complexity classes such as: PrQP PP BQP PP and PrQSPACE(S(n)) PrPSPACE(S(n)).
DOI
10.1117/12.620485

Related papers

Relationships between quantum and classical space-bounded complexity classes

John Watrous

This paper investigates the relative power of space-bounded quantum and classical (probabilistic) computational models. The following relationships are proved. 1. Any probabilistic Turing machine (PTM) which runs in space s and which halts absolutely (i.e. halts with certainty after a finite number of steps) can be simulated in space O(s) by a quantum Turing machine (QTM). If the PTM operates with bounded error, then the QTM may be taken to operate with bounded error as well, although the QTM may not halt absolutely in this case. In the unbounded error case, the QTM may be taken to halt absolutely. 2. Any QTM running in space s can be simulated by an unbounded error PTM running in space O(s). No assumptions on the probability of error or Turing time for the QTM are required, but it is assumed that all transition amplitudes of the quantum machine are rational. It follows that unbounded error, space O(s) bounded quantum Turing machines and probabilistic Turing machines are equivalent in power. This implies that any space s QTM can be simulated deterministically in space O(s/sup 2/), and further that any (unbounded-error) QTM running in log-space can be simulated in NC/sup 2/ We also consider quantum analogues of nondeterministic and one-sided error probabilistic space-bounded classes, and prove some simple relationships regarding these classes.

IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC)•Nov 27, 2002•15 citations

Computational Power of the Quantum Turing Automata

Sina Jafarpour, Mohammad Ghodsi, Keyvan Sadri +1 more

Lots of efforts in the last decades have been done to prove or disprove whether the set of polynomially bounded problems is equal to the set of polynomially verifiable problems. This paper will present an overview of the current beliefs of quantum complexity theorists and discussion detail the impacts these beliefs may have on the future of the field. We introduce a new form of Turing machine based on the concepts of quantum mechanics and investigate the domain of this novel definition for computation. The main object is to show the domain of these computation machines and the new definition of algorithms using these automata. In section one we give a brief fundamental overview of classical complexity theory, Turing machine and all the fundamental concepts required for the next chapters. In section two we describe various classes of classical complexity automata. In next chapter we introduce quantum complexity featuring quantum Turing machines and discuss its relationship to classical complexity. Section four presents a relationship between quantum complexity classes based on the quantum Turing machines and quantum oracles, and their relationship with corresponding classical complexity classes. And section five presents a discussion on the practical phenomena in problem solving using quantum computers. Finally in section five we speculate briefly on the direction we believe the field to be headed, and what might reasonably be expected in the future

•Apr 1, 2007•0 citations

Quantum complexity theory

Ethan Bernstein, Umesh V. Vazirani

Abstract. In this paper we study quantum computation from a complexity theoretic viewpoint. Our rst result is the existence of an ecient universal quantum Turing machine in Deutsch’s model of a quantum Turing machine (QTM) [Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 400 (1985), pp. 97{117]. This construction is substantially more complicated than the corresponding construction for classical Turing machines (TMs); in fact, even simple primitives such as looping, branching, and composition are not straightforward in the context of quantum Turing machines. We establish how these familiar primitives can be implemented and introduce some new, purely quantum mechanical primitives, such as changing the computational basis and carrying out an arbitrary unitary transformation of polynomially bounded dimension. We also consider the precision to which the transition amplitudes of a quantum Turing machine need to be specied. We prove that O(log T) bits of precision suce to support a T step computation. This justies the claim that the quantum Turing machine model should be regarded as a discrete model of computation and not an analog one. We give the rst formal evidence that quantum Turing machines violate the modern (complexity theoretic) formulation of the Church{Turing thesis. We show the existence of a problem, relative to an oracle, that can be solved in polynomial time on a quantum Turing machine, but requires superpolynomial time on a bounded-error probabilistic Turing machine, and thus not in the class BPP. The class BQP of languages that are eciently decidable (with small error-probability) on a quantum Turing machine satises BPP ⊆ BQP ⊆ P]P. Therefore, there is no possibility of giving a mathematical proof that quantum Turing machines are more powerful than classical probabilistic Turing machines (in the unrelativized setting) unless there is a major breakthrough in complexity theory.

ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC)•Jan 1, 1993•1,279 citations

Universality of quantum Turing machines with deterministic control

Paulo Mateus, Amı́lcar Sernadas, André Souto

A simple notion of quantum Turing machine with deterministic, classical control is proposed and shown to be powerful enough to compute any unitary transformation that is computable by a finitely generated quantum circuit. An efficient universal machine with the s-m-n property is presented. The BQP class is recovered. A robust notion of plain Kolmogorov complexity of quantum states is proposed and compared with those previously reported in the literature.

Journal of Logic and Computation•Feb 26, 2015•9 citations

Guest Column

Carlo Mereghetti, Beatrice Palano

Quantum computing is a prolific research area, halfway between physics and computer science [27, 29, 52]. Most likely, its origins may be dated back to 70's, when some works on quantum information began to appear (see, e.g., [34, 37]). In early 80's, R.P. Feynman suggested that the computational power of quantum mechanical processes might be beyond that of traditional computation models [25]. Almost at the same time, P. Benioff already proved that such processes are at least as powerful as Turing machines [9]. In 1985, D. Deutsch [22] proposed the notion of a quantum Turing machine as a physically realizable model for a quantum computer. From the point of view of structural complexity, E. Bernstein and U. Vazirani introduced in [20] the class BQP of problems solvable in polynomial time on quantum Turing machines, focusing attention on relations with the corresponding deterministic and probabilistic classes P and BPP, respectively. Several works in the literature explored classical issues in complexity theory from the quantum paradigm perspective (see, e.g., [7, 60, 61]).

ACM SIGACT News•Oct 17, 2021•4 citations

On computational power of classical and quantum branching programs

Farid Mansurovich Ablayev

We present a classical stochastic simulation technique of quantum Branching programs. This technique allows to prove the following relations among complexity classes: PrQP-BP &subuline; PP-BP and BQP-BP &subuline; PP-BP. Here BPP-BP and PP-BP stands for the classes of functions computable with bounded error and unbounded error respectively by stochastic branching program of polynomial size. BQP-BP and PrQP-BP stands the classes of functions computable with bounded error and unbounded error respectively by quantum branching program of polynomial size. Second. We present two different types, of complexity lower bounds for quantum nonuniform automata (OBDDs). We call them "metric" and "entropic" lower bounds in according to proof technique used. We present explicit Boolean functions that show that these lower bounds are tight enough. We show that when considering "almost all Boolean functions" on n variables our entropic lower bounds gives exponential (2c(δ)(n-log n)) lower bound for the width of quantum OBDDs depending on the error δ allowed.

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•May 24, 2006•1 citation
This paper investigates the relative power of space-bounded quantum and classical (probabilistic) computational models. The following relationships are proved. 1. Any probabilistic Turing machine (PTM) which runs in space s and which halts absolutely (i.e. halts with certainty after a finite number of steps) can be simulated in space O(s) by a quantum Turing machine (QTM). If the PTM operates with bounded error, then the QTM may be taken to operate with bounded error as well, although the QTM may not halt absolutely in this case. In the unbounded error case, the QTM may be taken to halt absolutely. 2. Any QTM running in space s can be simulated by an unbounded error PTM running in space O(s). No assumptions on the probability of error or Turing time for the QTM are required, but it is assumed that all transition amplitudes of the quantum machine are rational. It follows that unbounded error, space O(s) bounded quantum Turing machines and probabilistic Turing machines are equivalent in power. This implies that any space s QTM can be simulated deterministically in space O(s/sup 2/), and further that any (unbounded-error) QTM running in log-space can be simulated in NC/sup 2/ We also consider quantum analogues of nondeterministic and one-sided error probabilistic space-bounded classes, and prove some simple relationships regarding these classes.
Lots of efforts in the last decades have been done to prove or disprove whether the set of polynomially bounded problems is equal to the set of polynomially verifiable problems. This paper will present an overview of the current beliefs of quantum complexity theorists and discussion detail the impacts these beliefs may have on the future of the field. We introduce a new form of Turing machine based on the concepts of quantum mechanics and investigate the domain of this novel definition for computation. The main object is to show the domain of these computation machines and the new definition of algorithms using these automata. In section one we give a brief fundamental overview of classical complexity theory, Turing machine and all the fundamental concepts required for the next chapters. In section two we describe various classes of classical complexity automata. In next chapter we introduce quantum complexity featuring quantum Turing machines and discuss its relationship to classical complexity. Section four presents a relationship between quantum complexity classes based on the quantum Turing machines and quantum oracles, and their relationship with corresponding classical complexity classes. And section five presents a discussion on the practical phenomena in problem solving using quantum computers. Finally in section five we speculate briefly on the direction we believe the field to be headed, and what might reasonably be expected in the future
Abstract. In this paper we study quantum computation from a complexity theoretic viewpoint. Our rst result is the existence of an ecient universal quantum Turing machine in Deutsch’s model of a quantum Turing machine (QTM) [Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 400 (1985), pp. 97{117]. This construction is substantially more complicated than the corresponding construction for classical Turing machines (TMs); in fact, even simple primitives such as looping, branching, and composition are not straightforward in the context of quantum Turing machines. We establish how these familiar primitives can be implemented and introduce some new, purely quantum mechanical primitives, such as changing the computational basis and carrying out an arbitrary unitary transformation of polynomially bounded dimension. We also consider the precision to which the transition amplitudes of a quantum Turing machine need to be specied. We prove that O(log T) bits of precision suce to support a T step computation. This justies the claim that the quantum Turing machine model should be regarded as a discrete model of computation and not an analog one. We give the rst formal evidence that quantum Turing machines violate the modern (complexity theoretic) formulation of the Church{Turing thesis. We show the existence of a problem, relative to an oracle, that can be solved in polynomial time on a quantum Turing machine, but requires superpolynomial time on a bounded-error probabilistic Turing machine, and thus not in the class BPP. The class BQP of languages that are eciently decidable (with small error-probability) on a quantum Turing machine satises BPP ⊆ BQP ⊆ P]P. Therefore, there is no possibility of giving a mathematical proof that quantum Turing machines are more powerful than classical probabilistic Turing machines (in the unrelativized setting) unless there is a major breakthrough in complexity theory.
Quantum computing is a prolific research area, halfway between physics and computer science [27, 29, 52]. Most likely, its origins may be dated back to 70's, when some works on quantum information began to appear (see, e.g., [34, 37]). In early 80's, R.P. Feynman suggested that the computational power of quantum mechanical processes might be beyond that of traditional computation models [25]. Almost at the same time, P. Benioff already proved that such processes are at least as powerful as Turing machines [9]. In 1985, D. Deutsch [22] proposed the notion of a quantum Turing machine as a physically realizable model for a quantum computer. From the point of view of structural complexity, E. Bernstein and U. Vazirani introduced in [20] the class BQP of problems solvable in polynomial time on quantum Turing machines, focusing attention on relations with the corresponding deterministic and probabilistic classes P and BPP, respectively. Several works in the literature explored classical issues in complexity theory from the quantum paradigm perspective (see, e.g., [7, 60, 61]).
We present a classical stochastic simulation technique of quantum Branching programs. This technique allows to prove the following relations among complexity classes: PrQP-BP &subuline; PP-BP and BQP-BP &subuline; PP-BP. Here BPP-BP and PP-BP stands for the classes of functions computable with bounded error and unbounded error respectively by stochastic branching program of polynomial size. BQP-BP and PrQP-BP stands the classes of functions computable with bounded error and unbounded error respectively by quantum branching program of polynomial size. Second. We present two different types, of complexity lower bounds for quantum nonuniform automata (OBDDs). We call them "metric" and "entropic" lower bounds in according to proof technique used. We present explicit Boolean functions that show that these lower bounds are tight enough. We show that when considering "almost all Boolean functions" on n variables our entropic lower bounds gives exponential (2c(δ)(n-log n)) lower bound for the width of quantum OBDDs depending on the error δ allowed.