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

Mathematical logic quarterly

Fast quantum algorithms for handling probabilistic and interval uncertainty

Владик Крейнович, Luc Longpré

Published Aug 18, 2004• 20 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract In many real‐life situations, we are interested in the value of a physical quantity y that is difficult or impossible to measure directly. To estimate y, we find some easier‐to‐measure quantities x1, … , xn which are related to y by a known relation y = f(x1, … , xn). Measurements are never 100% accurate; hence, the measured values $ \tilde {x} _{i} $ are different from xi, and the resulting estimate $ \tilde {y} = f( \tilde {x} _{1} \ldots , \tilde {x} _{n}) $ is different from the desired value y = f(x1, … , xn). How different can it be? Traditional engineering approach to error estimation in data processing assumes that we know the probabilities of different measurement errors $ \Delta x_i {\mathop {=} \limits ^{\rm def}} \tilde x _i - x_i $. In many practical situations, we only know the upper bound Δi for this error; hence, after the measurement, the only information that we have about xi is that it belongs to the interval $ {\bf x}_i {\mathop {=} \limits ^{\rm def}} [ \tilde x _i - \Delta _i, \tilde x_i + \Delta _i] $. In this case, it is important to find the range y of all possible values of y = f(x1, … , xn) when xi ∈ xi. We start the paper with a brief overview of the computational complexity of the corresponding interval computation problems: Most of the related problems turn out to be, in general, at least NP‐hard. In this paper, we show how the use of quantum computing can speed up some computations related to interval and probabilistic uncertainty. We end the paper with speculations on whether (and how) “hypothetic” physical devices can compute NP‐hard problems faster than in exponential time. Most of the paper's results were first presented at NAFIPS'2003 [30]. (© 2004 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

DOI
10.1002/malq.200310116

Related papers

Quantum versions of k-CSP algorithms

Evgeny Yakovlevich Dantsin, Alexander Wolpert, Владик Крейнович

In data processing, we input the results xi of measuring easy-to-measure quantities xi and use these results to find estimates y = f (x1, . . ., xn) for difficult-to-measure quantities y which are related to xi by a known relation y = f(x1, . . ., xn). Due to measurement inaccuracy, the measured values xi are, in general, different from the (unknown) actual values xi of the measured quantities, hence the result y of data processing is different from the actual value of the quantity y.In many practical situations, we only know the bounds Δi on the measurement errors Δxi [EQUATION] xi - xi. In such situations, we only know that the actual value xi belongs to the interval [xi - Δi, xi + Δi], and we want to know the range of possible values of y. The corresponding problems of interval computations are NP-hard, so solving these problems may take an unrealistically long time. One way to speed up computations is to use quantum computing, and quantum versions of interval computations algorithms have indeed been developed.In many practical situations, we also know some constraints on the possible values of the directly measured quantities x1, . . ., xn. In such situations, we must combine interval techniques with constraint satisfaction techniques. It is therefore desirable to extend quantum interval algorithms to such combinations. As a first step towards this combination, in this paper, we consider quantum algorithms for discrete constraint satisfaction problems.

ACM Symposium on Applied Computing•Apr 23, 2006•0 citations

Quantum computation techniques for gauging reliability of interval and fuzzy data

Luc Longpré, Christian Servín, Владик Крейнович

In traditional interval computations, we assume that the interval data correspond to guaranteed interval bounds, and that fuzzy estimates provided by experts are correct. In practice, measuring instruments are not 100% reliable, and experts are not 100% reliable, we may have estimates which are ‘way off’, intervals which do not contain the actual values at all. Usually, we know the percentage of such outlier un-reliable measurements. However, it is desirable to check that the reliability of the actual data is indeed within the given percentage. The problem of checking (gauging) this reliability is, in general, NP-hard; in reasonable cases, there exist feasible algorithms for solving this problem. In this paper, we show that quantum computation techniques can drastically speed up the computation of reliability of the given data.

International Journal of General Systems•Nov 24, 2010•4 citations

Quantum computation techniques for gauging reliability of interval and fuzzy data

Luc Longpré, Christian Servín

In traditional interval computations, we assume that the interval data corresponds to guaranteed interval bounds, and that fuzzy estimates provided by experts are correct. In practice, measuring instruments are not 100% reliable, and experts are not 100% reliable, we may have estimates which are "way off", intervals which do not contain the actual values at all. Usually, we know the percentage of such outlier un-reliable measurements. However, it is desirable to check that the reliability of the actual data is indeed within the given percentage. The problem of checking (gauging) this reliability is, in general, NP-hard; in reasonable cases, there exist feasible algorithms for solving this problem. In this paper, we show that quantum computations techniques can drastically speed up the computation of reliability of given data.

Annual Meeting of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS)•May 1, 2008•2 citations

RESEARCH ARTICLE Quantum Computation Techniques for Gauging Reliability of Interval and Fuzzy Data

Christian Servín, Владик Крейнович

In traditional interval computations, we assume that the interval data corresponds to guaranteed interval bounds, and that fuzzy estimates provided by experts are correct. In practice, measuring instruments are not 100% reliable, and experts are not 100% reliable, we may have estimates which are \way ofi, intervals which do not contain the actual values at all. Usually, we know the percentage of such outlier un-reliable measurements. However, it is desirable to check that the reliability of the actual data is indeed within the given percentage. The problem of checking (gauging) this reliability is, in general, NP-hard; in reasonable cases, there exist feasible algorithms for solving this problem. In this paper, we show that quantum computations techniques can drastically speed up the computation of reliability of given data.

•Jan 1, 2009•0 citations

Towards the possibility of objective interval uncertainty in physics. II

Luc Longpré, Olga M. Kosheleva, Владик Крейнович

Applications of interval computations usually assume that while we only know an interval containing the actual (unknown) value of a physical quantity, there is the exact value of this quantity, and that in principle, we can get more and more accurate estimates of this value. Physicists know, however, that, due to uncertainty principle, there are limitations on how accurately we can measure the values of physical quantities. One of the important principles of modern physics is operationalism -- that a physical theory should only use observable properties. This principle is behind most successes of the 20th century physics, starting with relativity theory (vs. un-observable aether) and quantum mechanics. From this viewpoint, it is desirable to avoid using un-measurable exact values and to modify the mathematical formalisms behind physical theories so that they explicitly only take objective uncertainty into account. In this paper, we describe how this can be done for objective interval uncertainty.

Reliable Computing•May 1, 2011•1 citation

Optimal error intervals for properties of the quantum state

Xikun Li, Jiangwei Shang, Hui Khoon Ng +1 more

Quantum state estimation aims at determining the quantum state from observed data. Estimating the full state can require considerable efforts, but one is often only interested in a few properties of the state, such as the fidelity with a target state, or the degree of correlation for a specified bipartite structure. Rather than first estimating the state, one can, and should, estimate those quantities of interest directly from the data. We propose the use of optimal error intervals as a meaningful way of stating the accuracy of the estimated property values. Optimal error intervals are analogs of the optimal error regions for state estimation [New J. Phys. 15, 123026 (2013)]. They are optimal in two ways: They have the largest likelihood for the observed data and the prechosen size, and they are the smallest for the prechosen probability of containing the true value. As in the state situation, such optimal error intervals admit a simple description in terms of the marginal likelihood for the data for the properties of interest. Here, we present the concept and construction of optimal error intervals, report on an iterative algorithm for reliable computation of the marginal likelihood (a quantity difficult to calculate reliably), explain how plausible intervals---a notion of evidence provided by the data---are related to our optimal error intervals, and illustrate our methods with single-qubit and two-qubit examples.

arXiv:1602.05780•Physical Review A•Dec 13, 2016•22 citations
Abstract In many real‐life situations, we are interested in the value of a physical quantity y that is difficult or impossible to measure directly. To estimate y, we find some easier‐to‐measure quantities x1, … , xn which are related to y by a known relation y = f(x1, … , xn). Measurements are never 100% accurate; hence, the measured values x~i\tilde {x} _{i}x~i​ are different from xi, and the resulting estimate y~=f(x~1…,x~n)\tilde {y} = f( \tilde {x} _{1} \ldots , \tilde {x} _{n})y~​=f(x~1​…,x~n​) is different from the desired value y = f(x1, … , xn). How different can it be? Traditional engineering approach to error estimation in data processing assumes that we know the probabilities of different measurement errors Δxi=defx~i−xi\Delta x_i {\mathop {=} \limits ^{\rm def}} \tilde x _i - x_iΔxi​=defx~i​−xi​. In many practical situations, we only know the upper bound Δi for this error; hence, after the measurement, the only information that we have about xi is that it belongs to the interval xi=def[x~i−Δi,x~i+Δi]{\bf x}_i {\mathop {=} \limits ^{\rm def}} [ \tilde x _i - \Delta _i, \tilde x_i + \Delta _i]xi​=def[x~i​−Δi​,x~i​+Δi​]. In this case, it is important to find the range y of all possible values of y = f(x1, … , xn) when xi ∈ xi. We start the paper with a brief overview of the computational complexity of the corresponding interval computation problems: Most of the related problems turn out to be, in general, at least NP‐hard. In this paper, we show how the use of quantum computing can speed up some computations related to interval and probabilistic uncertainty. We end the paper with speculations on whether (and how) “hypothetic” physical devices can compute NP‐hard problems faster than in exponential time. Most of the paper's results were first presented at NAFIPS'2003 [30]. (© 2004 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
In data processing, we input the results xi of measuring easy-to-measure quantities xi and use these results to find estimates y = f (x1, . . ., xn) for difficult-to-measure quantities y which are related to xi by a known relation y = f(x1, . . ., xn). Due to measurement inaccuracy, the measured values xi are, in general, different from the (unknown) actual values xi of the measured quantities, hence the result y of data processing is different from the actual value of the quantity y.In many practical situations, we only know the bounds Δi on the measurement errors Δxi [EQUATION] xi - xi. In such situations, we only know that the actual value xi belongs to the interval [xi - Δi, xi + Δi], and we want to know the range of possible values of y. The corresponding problems of interval computations are NP-hard, so solving these problems may take an unrealistically long time. One way to speed up computations is to use quantum computing, and quantum versions of interval computations algorithms have indeed been developed.In many practical situations, we also know some constraints on the possible values of the directly measured quantities x1, . . ., xn. In such situations, we must combine interval techniques with constraint satisfaction techniques. It is therefore desirable to extend quantum interval algorithms to such combinations. As a first step towards this combination, in this paper, we consider quantum algorithms for discrete constraint satisfaction problems.
In traditional interval computations, we assume that the interval data correspond to guaranteed interval bounds, and that fuzzy estimates provided by experts are correct. In practice, measuring instruments are not 100% reliable, and experts are not 100% reliable, we may have estimates which are ‘way off’, intervals which do not contain the actual values at all. Usually, we know the percentage of such outlier un-reliable measurements. However, it is desirable to check that the reliability of the actual data is indeed within the given percentage. The problem of checking (gauging) this reliability is, in general, NP-hard; in reasonable cases, there exist feasible algorithms for solving this problem. In this paper, we show that quantum computation techniques can drastically speed up the computation of reliability of the given data.
In traditional interval computations, we assume that the interval data corresponds to guaranteed interval bounds, and that fuzzy estimates provided by experts are correct. In practice, measuring instruments are not 100% reliable, and experts are not 100% reliable, we may have estimates which are "way off", intervals which do not contain the actual values at all. Usually, we know the percentage of such outlier un-reliable measurements. However, it is desirable to check that the reliability of the actual data is indeed within the given percentage. The problem of checking (gauging) this reliability is, in general, NP-hard; in reasonable cases, there exist feasible algorithms for solving this problem. In this paper, we show that quantum computations techniques can drastically speed up the computation of reliability of given data.
In traditional interval computations, we assume that the interval data corresponds to guaranteed interval bounds, and that fuzzy estimates provided by experts are correct. In practice, measuring instruments are not 100% reliable, and experts are not 100% reliable, we may have estimates which are \way ofi, intervals which do not contain the actual values at all. Usually, we know the percentage of such outlier un-reliable measurements. However, it is desirable to check that the reliability of the actual data is indeed within the given percentage. The problem of checking (gauging) this reliability is, in general, NP-hard; in reasonable cases, there exist feasible algorithms for solving this problem. In this paper, we show that quantum computations techniques can drastically speed up the computation of reliability of given data.
Applications of interval computations usually assume that while we only know an interval containing the actual (unknown) value of a physical quantity, there is the exact value of this quantity, and that in principle, we can get more and more accurate estimates of this value. Physicists know, however, that, due to uncertainty principle, there are limitations on how accurately we can measure the values of physical quantities. One of the important principles of modern physics is operationalism -- that a physical theory should only use observable properties. This principle is behind most successes of the 20th century physics, starting with relativity theory (vs. un-observable aether) and quantum mechanics. From this viewpoint, it is desirable to avoid using un-measurable exact values and to modify the mathematical formalisms behind physical theories so that they explicitly only take objective uncertainty into account. In this paper, we describe how this can be done for objective interval uncertainty.
Quantum state estimation aims at determining the quantum state from observed data. Estimating the full state can require considerable efforts, but one is often only interested in a few properties of the state, such as the fidelity with a target state, or the degree of correlation for a specified bipartite structure. Rather than first estimating the state, one can, and should, estimate those quantities of interest directly from the data. We propose the use of optimal error intervals as a meaningful way of stating the accuracy of the estimated property values. Optimal error intervals are analogs of the optimal error regions for state estimation [New J. Phys. 15, 123026 (2013)]. They are optimal in two ways: They have the largest likelihood for the observed data and the prechosen size, and they are the smallest for the prechosen probability of containing the true value. As in the state situation, such optimal error intervals admit a simple description in terms of the marginal likelihood for the data for the properties of interest. Here, we present the concept and construction of optimal error intervals, report on an iterative algorithm for reliable computation of the marginal likelihood (a quantity difficult to calculate reliably), explain how plausible intervals---a notion of evidence provided by the data---are related to our optimal error intervals, and illustrate our methods with single-qubit and two-qubit examples.