Consider the problem of estimating the median of N items to a precision epsilon, i.e., the estimate should be such that, with a high probability, the number of items, with values both smaller than and larger than this estimate, is less than N*(1+epsilon)/2. Any classical algorithm to do this will need at least O(1/epsilon^2) samples. Quantum mechanical systems can simultaneously carry out multiple computations due to their wave like properties. This paper describes an O(1/epsilon) step algorithm for the above estimation.
A quantum computer has a clear advantage over a classical computer for exhaustive search. The quantum mechanical algorithm for exhaustive search was originally derived by using subtle properties of a particular quantum mechanical operation called the Walsh-Hadamard (W-H) transform. This paper shows that this algorithm can be implemented by replacing the W-H transform by almost any quantum mechanical operation. This leads to several new applications where it improves the number of steps by a square root. It also broadens the scope for implementation since it demonstrates quantum mechanical algorithms that can adapt to available technology.
Due to the difficulty of constructing new quantum algorithms, frameworks that facilitate this construction are of great importance in quantum computing. These frameworks reduce the problem of coming up with a quantum algorithm to that of constructing some combinatorial object that is often much simpler to reason about. The implementation and analysis of an algorithm for the specified problem follow from the properties of this object. A number of such frameworks have been extremely successful in leading to the development of numerous quantum algorithms for a variety of problems. In this thesis, we build on two of these frameworks, the quantum walk search framework, and the span program framework, extending their algorithmic potential. \n \nThe quantum walk search framework gives a generic quantum analogue to a specific type of classical algorithm based on random walks. If one can construct a classical algorithm of this form, a corresponding quantum algorithm with better complexity immediately follows. In this framework, a generic algorithm is constructed from several subroutines for which implementations must be given for each application. One of these subroutines, a checking subroutine, is run many times throughout the algorithm. This subroutine may be implemented by any quantum algorithm that satisfies the required functionality, including another quantum walk algorithm. By making a slight modification to the quantum walk framework, we can show how to nest a quantum walk algorithm in the checking subroutine of another quantum walk algorithm in a way that gives better complexity than the naive nesting. This modification allows us to reproduce a number of upper bounds previously obtained in another framework, the learning graph framework, including upper bounds for triangle finding, and more generally, subgraph finding for constant-sized subgraphs. Porting these upper bounds over to the setting of quantum walks is desirable because the algorithms achieved in the quantum walk search framework are much more explicit than those of the learning graph framework, making them easier to work with, modify, and build on, as needed. Our efficient nested checking idea has already been used to come up with new quantum algorithms for finding sub-hypergraphs. \n \nAnother subroutine that is called repeatedly by the generic quantum walk search algorithm is the update subroutine. It was not clear how to use a quantum walk algorithm to perform this step, but by making another slight modification to the quantum walk search framework, we are able to show how to nest a quantum walk in the update step of another quantum walk in an efficient way. Our technique for doing this is a special case of a technique that allows the update to be implemented with garbage --- i.e., some unwanted data in an auxiliary register, entangled with the desired state. This technique may have other applications. \n \nUsing the nested update technique, we are able to improve the best known upper bounds on the time complexity of
k-distinctness. Previously the best known upper bound on the time complexity was
nk/(k+1), due to Ambainis. Belovs had recently improved the query complexity of
k-distinctness to
o(n3/4) for all
k, but since this upper bound was obtained in a framework called span programs, which only gives upper bounds on quantum query complexity, there was no known time efficient implementation of his
k-distinctness algorithm. We use ideas from his construction and our nested update technique to get a quantum time upper bound for
3-distinctness of
n5/7, matching his quantum query upper bound. We can generalize our algorithm get a time upper bound of
n(k−1)/k for any
k>3, slightly improving on the best previous upper bound. \n \nAnother framework, the span program framework, is known to be equivalent to quantum query complexity, in the sense that for any Boolean decision problem, there exists a span program construction that yields a tight upper bound on its quantum query complexity. We explore several variations of this framework. First, we slightly modify the definition of a span program so that we can show that for \\emph{any} (not necessarily Boolean) decision problem, there is a span program construction that yields a tight upper bound on its quantum query complexity. Previously this was only known up to logarithmic factors. We also explore several approximate versions of span programs, and show them to be equivalent. Finally, we explore the structure of span program witnesses, and use this structure to present an algorithm for evaluating span programs that is straightforward and intuitive. We also show how to evaluate approximate span programs, opening the possibility for the construction of new upper bounds using approximate span programs.
A quantum computer directly manipulates information stored in the state of quantum mechanical systems. The available operations have many attractive features but also underly severe restrictions, which complicate the design of quantum algorithms. We present a divide-and-conquer approach to the design of various quantum algorithms. The class of algorithm includes many transforms which are well-known in classical signal processing applications. We show how fast quantum algorithms can be derived for the discrete Fourier transform, the Walsh-Hadamard transform, the Slant transform, and the Hartley transform. All these algorithms use at most O(log^2 N) operations to transform a state vector of a quantum computer of length N.
An unsorted database contains N records, of which just one satisfies a particular property.The problem is to identify that one record.Any classical algorithm, deterministic or probabilistic, will clearly take O (N) steps since on the average it will have to examine a large fraction of the N records.Quantum mechanical systems can do several operations simultaneously due to their wave like properties.This paper gives an O ( JN) step quantum mechanical algorithm for identifying that record.It is within a constant factor of the fastest possible quantum mechanical algorithm.
We discuss quantum algorithms that calculate numerical integrals and descriptive statistics of stochastic processes. With either of two distinct approaches, one obtains an exponential speed increase in comparison to the fastest known classical deterministic algorithms and a quadratic speed increase in comparison to classical Monte Carlo (probabilistic) methods. We derive a simpler and slightly faster version of Grover's mean algorithm, demonstrate how to apply quantum counting to the problem, develop some variations of these algorithms, and show how both (apparently quite different) approaches can be understood from the same unified framework. Finally, we discuss how the exponential speed increase appears to (but does not) violate results obtained via the method of polynomials, from which it is known that a bounded-error quantum algorithm for computing a total function can be only polynomially more efficient than the fastest deterministic classical algorithm.