Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Optimization
Quantum State Preparation Representation
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum Simulation
In Quantum Computing Speedup Illusory?: The False Coin of "Counting Function Evaluations"
arXiv
Authors: David Ellerman
Year
2014
Paper ID
8283
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
197
Citations
N/A
Abstract
By using a new way to encode Boolean functions in a reversible gate, an algorithm is developed in quantum computing over Z_2, symbolized QC/2, (as opposed to QC over C) that needs only one function evaluation to solve the Grover Database Search Problem of finding a designated record among 2^m records for any m. In the usual Grover algorithm in quantum computing over C, one needs essentially Sqrt2m function evaluations as opposed to the average of 2m/2 functions evaluations needed in the classical algorithm. The one function evaluation of the QC/2 algorithm (for any m) represents such a super speedup, even over the Grover algorithm in QC/C, that one feels something has gone awry. Indeed, our analysis of the transparent calculations of Boolean functions over Z_2 shows that the classical algorithm is just repackaged in a rather obvious way in the single function evaluation of the QC/2 algorithm--whereas the calculations are hidden and non-transparent in the Grover QC/C algorithm using C. The conclusion in both cases (which is rather obvious in the QC/2 case) is that "counting function evaluations" is a false coin to measure speedup in the comparison between quantum and classical computing.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- By using a new way to encode Boolean functions in a reversible gate, an algorithm is developed in quantum computing over Z_2, symbolized QC/2, (as opposed to QC over C) that...
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.