Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Algorithms

Connectivity is a Poor Indicator of Fast Quantum Search

arXiv
Authors: David A. Meyer, Thomas G. Wong

Year

2014

Paper ID

47402

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

133

Citations

N/A

Abstract

A randomly walking quantum particle evolving by Schrödinger's equation searches on d-dimensional cubic lattices in O\(sqrt{N}\) time when d ge 5, and with progressively slower runtime as d decreases. This suggests that graph connectivity (including vertex, edge, algebraic, and normalized algebraic connectivities) is an indicator of fast quantum search, a belief supported by fast quantum search on complete graphs, strongly regular graphs, and hypercubes, all of which are highly connected. In this paper, we show this intuition to be false by giving two examples of graphs for which the opposite holds true: one with low connectivity but fast search, and one with high connectivity but slow search. The second example is a novel two-stage quantum walk algorithm in which the walking rate must be adjusted to yield high search probability.

Why This Paper Matters

  • It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • A randomly walking quantum particle evolving by Schrödinger's equation searches on d-dimensional cubic lattices in O(sqrtN) time when d ge 5, and with progressively slower...

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

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #47402 #69983 Spectral Leakage and Masking Ef... #69982 Dimensionality Reduction of QAO... #69981 A Hybrid Quantum-Classical Appr... #69980 Complexity Inequalities for Qua...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

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.