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

Cambridge University Press eBooks

Generalized Proof-Nets for Compact Categories with Biproducts

Ross Duncan

Published Nov 30, 2009• 4 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Just as conventional functional programs may be understood as proofs in an intuitionistic logic, so quantum processes can also be viewed as proofs in a suitable logic.We describe such a logic, the logic of compact closed categories and biproducts, presented both as a sequent calculus and as a system of proof-nets. This logic captures much of the necessary structure needed to represent quantum processes under classical control, while remaining agnostic to the fine details. We demonstrate how to represent quantum processes as proof-nets and show that the dynamic behavior of a quantum process is captured by the cut-elimination procedure for the logic. We show that the cut-elimination procedure is strongly normalizing: that is, that every legal way of simplifying a proof-net leads to the same, unique, normal form. Finally, taking some initial set of operations as nonlogical axioms, we show that that the resulting category of proof-nets is a representation of the free compact closed category with biproducts generated by those operations. 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 Logic, Processes, and Categories Birkhoff and von Neumann initiated the logical study of quantum mechanics in their well-known 1936 paper. They constructed a logic by assigning a proposition letter to each observable property of a given quantum system and studied negations, conjunctions, and disjunctions of these properties. The resulting lattice is nondistributive, and so the heart of what is called “quantum logic” is the study of various kinds of nondistributive lattices.

DOI
10.1017/cbo9781139193313.004

Related papers

Generalised Proof-Nets for Compact Categories with Biproducts

Duncan, Ross

Just as conventional functional programs may be understood as proofs in an intuitionistic logic, so quantum processes can also be viewed as proofs in a suitable logic. We describe such a logic, the logic of compact closed categories and biproducts, presented both as a sequent calculus and as a system of proof-nets. This logic captures much of the necessary structure needed to represent quantum processes under classical control, while remaining agnostic to the fine details. We demonstrate how to represent quantum processes as proof-nets, and show that the dynamic behaviour of a quantum process is captured by the cut-elimination procedure for the logic. We show that the cut elimination procedure is strongly normalising: that is, that every legal way of simplifying a proof-net leads to the same, unique, normal form. Finally, taking some initial set of operations as non-logical axioms, we show that that the resulting category of proof-nets is a representation of the free compact closed category with biproducts generated by those operations.

arXiv:0903.5154•Mar 30, 2009•4 citations

A Categorical Quantum Logic

Samson Abramsky, Ross Duncan

We define a strongly normalising proof-net calculus corresponding to the logic of strongly compact closed categories with biproducts. The calculus is a full and faithful representation of the free strongly compact closed category with biproducts on a given category with an involution. This syntax can be used to represent and reason about quantum processes. 1

•Jan 1, 2004•71 citations

A categorical quantum logic

Samson Abramsky, ROSS DUNCAN

We define a strongly normalising proof-net calculus corresponding to the logic of strongly compact closed categories with biproducts. The calculus is a full and faithful representation of the free strongly compact closed category with biproducts on a given category with an involution. This syntax can be used to represent and reason about quantum processes.

arXiv:quant-ph/0512114•Mathematical Structures in Computer Science•Jun 1, 2006•31 citations

Types for Quantum Computing

Duncan, Ross

This thesis is a study of the construction and representation of typed models of quantum mechanics for use in quantum computation. We introduce logical and graphical syntax for quantum mechanical processes and prove that these formal systems provide sound and complete representations of abstract quantum mechanics. In addition, we demonstrate how these representations may be used to reason about the behaviour of quantum computational processes. Quantum computation is presently mired in low-level formalisms, mostly derived directly from matrices over Hilbert spaces. These formalisms are an obstacle to the full understanding and exploitation of quantum effects in informatics since they obscure the essential structure of quantum states and processes. The aim of this work is to introduce higher level tools for quantum mechanics which will be better suited to computation than those presently employed in the field. Inessential details of Hilbert space representations are removed and the informatic structures are presented directly. Entangled states are particularly important in this treatment, as is appropriate, since entanglement is a fundamental driver of quantum computation. The benefits two-fold: as well as producing foundational tools for the study of quantum computation this work also connects quantum mechanics to mainstream areas of computer science such as categorical logic, type theory, program language semantics, and rewriting. We describe, following Abramsky and Coecke, how quantum mechanics may be carried out without reference to Hilbert space, in a strongly compact closed category. In particular we show how to freely construct a categorical model of abstract quantum mechanics from an arbitrary category. We introduceMultiplicative Categorical Quantum Logic (mCQL), a sequent calculus whose proof rules capture the structure of compact closed categories. This sequent calculus is interpreted in a freely generated compact closed category, and its semantics is sound with respect to cut elimination. We define an equivalent graphical syntax, similar to linear logic’s proof-nets, and prove that these proof-nets provide a full and faithful representation of any freely generated compact closed category. Further analysis of the structure of quantum states which correspond to mCQL proofs using multiplicative linear logic shows that the linear type system describes the quantum entanglement found in such states. We show that the entanglement present in these states is always of a particularly simple form: collections of entangled pairs. In order to tackle arbitrary entanglement, we generalise the work of Kelly and Laplaza to give a representation theorem for the free compact closed category by a polycategory. Such categories are shown to be equivalent to a generalised system of proof-nets whose axioms may have more than one premise

•Jan 1, 2006•34 citations

Introduction to a Quantum Logic

Enrico G. Beltrametti, Gianni Cassinelli, Peter Carruthers

Sentences Associated with a Quantum System and Their Truth Values In a sense this chapter is marginal to the content of this volume; the reader can skip it without prejudice to the comprehension of chapters to follow. Quantum logic is a discipline that branched off from the 1936 paper of Birkhoff and von Neumann and has the orthomodular-poset structures encountered in previous chapters as basic mathematical carriers: that is why we think it worthwhile to devote some pages to the subject. But the main interests quantum logic calls into play are in the territory of logicians and philosophers: that is why we (who are neither logicians nor philosophers) shall confine ourselves to a very simplified introduction to the subject. Roughly, the starting question is whether the propositions of a quantum system can be associated with, or can be interpreted as, sentences of a language (or propositional calculus) and which rules this language inherits from the ordered structure of propositions. In raising this question one has in mind the fact that when the physical system is classical its propositions form a Boolean algebra, and Boolean algebras are the algebraic models of the calculus of classical logic. Thus the question above can also be phrased as follows: when a Boolean algebra is relaxed into an orthomodular nondistributive lattice, which logic is it the model of? “Quantum logic” is the name that designates the answer, but there are several views about the content of this name. Here we sketch one approach to a quantum logic.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Dec 28, 1984•1 citation

Quantum Logic

Peter Mittelstaedt

It has been shown by Birkhoff and v. Neumann (1936) and by Jauch and Piron (1963,1964,1968) that the subspaces of Hilbert space constitute an orthocomplemented quasi-modular lattice Lq, if one considers between two subspaces (elements) a, b the relation a⊆b and the operations a∩b, a∪b, a⊥. Furthermore, since the subspaces can be interpreted as quantum mechanical propositions, and since the operations ∩,∪ ,⊥ have some similarity with the logical operations ⋀ (and), ⋁ (or) and ⌝ (not), the question has been raised already by Birkhoff and v. Neumann, whether the lattice of subspaces of Hilbert space can be interpreted as a propositional calculus, sometimes called quantum logic. There are many kinds of lattices which can be interpreted as a propositional or logical calculus. A Boolean lattice LB of propositions corresponds to the calculus of classical logic and an implicative (Birkhoff, 1961) lattice Li has as a model the calculus of effective (intuitionistic) logic.

PSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association•Jan 1, 1974•0 citations
Just as conventional functional programs may be understood as proofs in an intuitionistic logic, so quantum processes can also be viewed as proofs in a suitable logic.We describe such a logic, the logic of compact closed categories and biproducts, presented both as a sequent calculus and as a system of proof-nets. This logic captures much of the necessary structure needed to represent quantum processes under classical control, while remaining agnostic to the fine details. We demonstrate how to represent quantum processes as proof-nets and show that the dynamic behavior of a quantum process is captured by the cut-elimination procedure for the logic. We show that the cut-elimination procedure is strongly normalizing: that is, that every legal way of simplifying a proof-net leads to the same, unique, normal form. Finally, taking some initial set of operations as nonlogical axioms, we show that that the resulting category of proof-nets is a representation of the free compact closed category with biproducts generated by those operations. 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 Logic, Processes, and Categories Birkhoff and von Neumann initiated the logical study of quantum mechanics in their well-known 1936 paper. They constructed a logic by assigning a proposition letter to each observable property of a given quantum system and studied negations, conjunctions, and disjunctions of these properties. The resulting lattice is nondistributive, and so the heart of what is called “quantum logic” is the study of various kinds of nondistributive lattices.
Just as conventional functional programs may be understood as proofs in an intuitionistic logic, so quantum processes can also be viewed as proofs in a suitable logic. We describe such a logic, the logic of compact closed categories and biproducts, presented both as a sequent calculus and as a system of proof-nets. This logic captures much of the necessary structure needed to represent quantum processes under classical control, while remaining agnostic to the fine details. We demonstrate how to represent quantum processes as proof-nets, and show that the dynamic behaviour of a quantum process is captured by the cut-elimination procedure for the logic. We show that the cut elimination procedure is strongly normalising: that is, that every legal way of simplifying a proof-net leads to the same, unique, normal form. Finally, taking some initial set of operations as non-logical axioms, we show that that the resulting category of proof-nets is a representation of the free compact closed category with biproducts generated by those operations.
This thesis is a study of the construction and representation of typed models of quantum mechanics for use in quantum computation. We introduce logical and graphical syntax for quantum mechanical processes and prove that these formal systems provide sound and complete representations of abstract quantum mechanics. In addition, we demonstrate how these representations may be used to reason about the behaviour of quantum computational processes. Quantum computation is presently mired in low-level formalisms, mostly derived directly from matrices over Hilbert spaces. These formalisms are an obstacle to the full understanding and exploitation of quantum effects in informatics since they obscure the essential structure of quantum states and processes. The aim of this work is to introduce higher level tools for quantum mechanics which will be better suited to computation than those presently employed in the field. Inessential details of Hilbert space representations are removed and the informatic structures are presented directly. Entangled states are particularly important in this treatment, as is appropriate, since entanglement is a fundamental driver of quantum computation. The benefits two-fold: as well as producing foundational tools for the study of quantum computation this work also connects quantum mechanics to mainstream areas of computer science such as categorical logic, type theory, program language semantics, and rewriting. We describe, following Abramsky and Coecke, how quantum mechanics may be carried out without reference to Hilbert space, in a strongly compact closed category. In particular we show how to freely construct a categorical model of abstract quantum mechanics from an arbitrary category. We introduceMultiplicative Categorical Quantum Logic (mCQL), a sequent calculus whose proof rules capture the structure of compact closed categories. This sequent calculus is interpreted in a freely generated compact closed category, and its semantics is sound with respect to cut elimination. We define an equivalent graphical syntax, similar to linear logic’s proof-nets, and prove that these proof-nets provide a full and faithful representation of any freely generated compact closed category. Further analysis of the structure of quantum states which correspond to mCQL proofs using multiplicative linear logic shows that the linear type system describes the quantum entanglement found in such states. We show that the entanglement present in these states is always of a particularly simple form: collections of entangled pairs. In order to tackle arbitrary entanglement, we generalise the work of Kelly and Laplaza to give a representation theorem for the free compact closed category by a polycategory. Such categories are shown to be equivalent to a generalised system of proof-nets whose axioms may have more than one premise
Sentences Associated with a Quantum System and Their Truth Values In a sense this chapter is marginal to the content of this volume; the reader can skip it without prejudice to the comprehension of chapters to follow. Quantum logic is a discipline that branched off from the 1936 paper of Birkhoff and von Neumann and has the orthomodular-poset structures encountered in previous chapters as basic mathematical carriers: that is why we think it worthwhile to devote some pages to the subject. But the main interests quantum logic calls into play are in the territory of logicians and philosophers: that is why we (who are neither logicians nor philosophers) shall confine ourselves to a very simplified introduction to the subject. Roughly, the starting question is whether the propositions of a quantum system can be associated with, or can be interpreted as, sentences of a language (or propositional calculus) and which rules this language inherits from the ordered structure of propositions. In raising this question one has in mind the fact that when the physical system is classical its propositions form a Boolean algebra, and Boolean algebras are the algebraic models of the calculus of classical logic. Thus the question above can also be phrased as follows: when a Boolean algebra is relaxed into an orthomodular nondistributive lattice, which logic is it the model of? “Quantum logic” is the name that designates the answer, but there are several views about the content of this name. Here we sketch one approach to a quantum logic.
It has been shown by Birkhoff and v. Neumann (1936) and by Jauch and Piron (1963,1964,1968) that the subspaces of Hilbert space constitute an orthocomplemented quasi-modular lattice Lq, if one considers between two subspaces (elements) a, b the relation a⊆b and the operations a∩b, a∪b, a⊥. Furthermore, since the subspaces can be interpreted as quantum mechanical propositions, and since the operations ∩,∪ ,⊥ have some similarity with the logical operations ⋀ (and), ⋁ (or) and ⌝ (not), the question has been raised already by Birkhoff and v. Neumann, whether the lattice of subspaces of Hilbert space can be interpreted as a propositional calculus, sometimes called quantum logic. There are many kinds of lattices which can be interpreted as a propositional or logical calculus. A Boolean lattice LB of propositions corresponds to the calculus of classical logic and an implicative (Birkhoff, 1961) lattice Li has as a model the calculus of effective (intuitionistic) logic.