!
You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Simulation
Classical simulation of quantum circuits by half Gauss sums
arXiv
Authors: Kaifeng Bu, Dax Enshan Koh
Year
2018
Paper ID
22981
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
114
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We give an efficient algorithm to evaluate a certain class of exponential sums, namely the periodic, quadratic, multivariate half Gauss sums. We show that these exponential sums become \#mathsf{P}-hard to compute when we omit either the periodicity or quadraticity condition. We apply our results about these exponential sums to the classical simulation of quantum circuits, and give an alternative proof of the Gottesman-Knill theorem. We also explore a connection between these exponential sums and the Holant framework. In particular, we generalize the existing definition of affine signatures to arbitrary dimensions, and use our results about half Gauss sums to show that the Holant problem for the set of affine signatures is tractable.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2018 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We give an efficient algorithm to evaluate a certain class of exponential sums, namely the periodic, quadratic, multivariate half Gauss sums.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.