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

An analysis of ontological entities to represent knowledge on quantum computing algorithms and implementations

Darya Martyniuk, Michael Falkenthal, Naouel Karam, Adrian Paschke, Karoline Wild

Published Dec 14, 2022• 4 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Paper 15, 9 S.
DOI
10.24406/publica-fhg-410731

Related papers

Relational Quantum Computing with Tensor Networks and Quantum Measurement

Jincheng Zhang

This paper proposes a novel framework for relational quantum computing, leveraging the power of tensor networks and targeted quantum measurement. The core idea is to represent complex relational datasets using tensor networks, performing quantum operations on the tensor components, and then employing specific measurement protocols to extract meaningful information. This approach aims to overcome the limitations of traditional quantum computing when dealing with data that inherently involves relationships between entities. We outline the key components of this framework, including tensor network encoding, quantum gate implementation within the tensor structure, and measurement strategies designed for relational data. The potential impact of this approach on areas such as knowledge representation, database querying, and social network analysis is discussed. The framework's efficiency stems from the ability to exploit entanglement and quantum superposition within the tensor network representation, allowing for parallel computations and potentially faster solutions compared to classical algorithms for relational problems.

•Sep 5, 2026•0 citations

A Quantum Computational Semantics for Epistemic Logical Operators. Part II: Semantics

Enrico G. Beltrametti, María Luisa Dalla Chiara, Roberto Giuntini +2 more

arXiv:1602.07517•International Journal of Theoretical Physics•Jul 8, 2013•13 citations

A Quantum Computational Semantics for Epistemic Logical Operators. Part I: Epistemic Structures

Enrico G. Beltrametti, María Luisa Dalla Chiara, Roberto Giuntini +2 more

arXiv:1602.07514•International Journal of Theoretical Physics•Jun 1, 2013•9 citations

Ontological Foundations of Cognition in Quantum Physics

Клёцкин Михаил Васильевич

The aim of the article is to analyze the ontological foundations of quantum mechanics and the relationship of various interpretations of quantum mechanics with the question of truth in scientific knowledge. The theoretical material (various interpretations of quantum mechanics) was analyzed. The research methods were analysis, comparative-historical and institutional approaches. On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that physicists are only able to predict the probabilities of physical phenomena or processes, without any knowledge of the structure of entity in itself. The study helps to complement the theoretical picture of the ontology of quantum mechanics and to get an idea about the development prospects of the methodology of physical sciences. We should not ascribe properties that are unobservable in experience to the entity because science can truly interpret only the representation of entity in itself in experience and the ways of dealing with it, not future events or possible states of the entity. Otherwise, science “slides” down to the level of dialectical (rhetorical) exercises based not on true premises, but on generally accepted or “authoritative” biases, which gives room to extreme forms of relativism and takes natural scientists away from studying nature to inventing empirically unsupported hypotheses. When, in accordance with the Cartesian ontology, the scientist assumes that the entity is as the “subject” observes it (that is, the “reflection” of the entity in consciousness is identified with entity in itself), this assumption leads the scientist to attempts to “scientifically” describe the future events or the possible states of the entity. The criterion for the truth of a scientific theory put forward by Einstein in his dispute with Bohr remains a fundamentally unattainable ideal. Cognition of nature is probabilistically and fundamentally incomplete since a person can consciously comprehend natural phenomena only within the framework of their representation in the existing being. The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics is due to the impossibility of knowing things as they exist by themselves, that is, as they exist outside of representation in the mind of the observer. This does not mean that physical entities did not exist before their knowledge: they existed potentially, but were not valid for the observer, that is, conscious. Quantum physics is as incomplete as any other physical theory when compared with an unattainable ideal, but this fact does not negate its truth for modern scientists since quantum theory is based on the results of verified experiments.

Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta•Jan 1, 2021•0 citations

Particles in Quantum Field Theory

Doreen Fraser

An important way in which quantum field theory (QFT) differs from non-relativistic quantum mechanics is that in QFT systems generically possess an infinite number of degrees of freedom. This chapter examines the proposals for non-fundamental roles that the particle concept plays in particle physics. The fields which feature in the QFT formalism are mathematical expressions; work needs to be done to determine the ontological properties of the entities that are represented by the mathematical field formalism. One difficulty for the quanta interpretation of QFT is that the analysis in terms of quanta offered in the preceding paragraphs is restricted to free systems. The no-go results for interacting systems inspire a different approach to regarding particles as non-fundamental entities. The fields which feature in the QFT formalism are mathematical expressions; work needs to be done to determine the ontological properties of the entities that are represented by the mathematical field formalism.

Routledge eBooks•Aug 11, 2021•26 citations

A Formal Analysis of Quantum Algorithms

Benoît Valiron

•Jan 1, 2018•0 citations
This paper proposes a novel framework for relational quantum computing, leveraging the power of tensor networks and targeted quantum measurement. The core idea is to represent complex relational datasets using tensor networks, performing quantum operations on the tensor components, and then employing specific measurement protocols to extract meaningful information. This approach aims to overcome the limitations of traditional quantum computing when dealing with data that inherently involves relationships between entities. We outline the key components of this framework, including tensor network encoding, quantum gate implementation within the tensor structure, and measurement strategies designed for relational data. The potential impact of this approach on areas such as knowledge representation, database querying, and social network analysis is discussed. The framework's efficiency stems from the ability to exploit entanglement and quantum superposition within the tensor network representation, allowing for parallel computations and potentially faster solutions compared to classical algorithms for relational problems.
The aim of the article is to analyze the ontological foundations of quantum mechanics and the relationship of various interpretations of quantum mechanics with the question of truth in scientific knowledge. The theoretical material (various interpretations of quantum mechanics) was analyzed. The research methods were analysis, comparative-historical and institutional approaches. On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that physicists are only able to predict the probabilities of physical phenomena or processes, without any knowledge of the structure of entity in itself. The study helps to complement the theoretical picture of the ontology of quantum mechanics and to get an idea about the development prospects of the methodology of physical sciences. We should not ascribe properties that are unobservable in experience to the entity because science can truly interpret only the representation of entity in itself in experience and the ways of dealing with it, not future events or possible states of the entity. Otherwise, science “slides” down to the level of dialectical (rhetorical) exercises based not on true premises, but on generally accepted or “authoritative” biases, which gives room to extreme forms of relativism and takes natural scientists away from studying nature to inventing empirically unsupported hypotheses. When, in accordance with the Cartesian ontology, the scientist assumes that the entity is as the “subject” observes it (that is, the “reflection” of the entity in consciousness is identified with entity in itself), this assumption leads the scientist to attempts to “scientifically” describe the future events or the possible states of the entity. The criterion for the truth of a scientific theory put forward by Einstein in his dispute with Bohr remains a fundamentally unattainable ideal. Cognition of nature is probabilistically and fundamentally incomplete since a person can consciously comprehend natural phenomena only within the framework of their representation in the existing being. The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics is due to the impossibility of knowing things as they exist by themselves, that is, as they exist outside of representation in the mind of the observer. This does not mean that physical entities did not exist before their knowledge: they existed potentially, but were not valid for the observer, that is, conscious. Quantum physics is as incomplete as any other physical theory when compared with an unattainable ideal, but this fact does not negate its truth for modern scientists since quantum theory is based on the results of verified experiments.
An important way in which quantum field theory (QFT) differs from non-relativistic quantum mechanics is that in QFT systems generically possess an infinite number of degrees of freedom. This chapter examines the proposals for non-fundamental roles that the particle concept plays in particle physics. The fields which feature in the QFT formalism are mathematical expressions; work needs to be done to determine the ontological properties of the entities that are represented by the mathematical field formalism. One difficulty for the quanta interpretation of QFT is that the analysis in terms of quanta offered in the preceding paragraphs is restricted to free systems. The no-go results for interacting systems inspire a different approach to regarding particles as non-fundamental entities. The fields which feature in the QFT formalism are mathematical expressions; work needs to be done to determine the ontological properties of the entities that are represented by the mathematical field formalism.