Skip to main content
Log in

Quantum computing models as a tool box for controlling and understanding the nanoscopic world

  • Reguläre Beiträge
  • Published:
Informatik - Forschung und Entwicklung

Abstract

Progress in controlling quantum systems is the major pre-requisite for the realization of quantum computing, yet the results of quantum computing research can also be useful in solving quantum control problems that are not related to computational problems. We arguethat quantum computing provides clear concepts and simple models for discussing quantum theoretical problems. In this article we describe examples from completely different fields where models of quantum computing and quantum communication shed light on quantum theory.

First we address quantum limits of classical low power computation and argue that the terms of quantum information theory allows us to discuss device-independent bounds. We argue that a classical bit behaves to some extent like a quantum bit in the time period where it switches its logical value. This implies that a readout during the switching process generates entropy. A related problem is the distribution of timing information like clock signals in low power devices. For low signal energy, the situation is close to phase-covariant cloning problems in quantum information theory.

Second we rephrase a classical statistical method to draw causal conclusions from data of a clinical drug-testing experiment. Since this method, as it is described in the literature, relies on a hidden-variable model of patient’s behaviour it leads to misconclusions if quantum theory infact does play a role in the human mind. The toy model we use to illustrate this is formally a quantum communication protocol in the presence of entanglement. We argue that quantum information theory could put classical statistical reasoning on a safer basis because it does not need hidden-variable models of nature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nielsen M, Chuang I (2000) Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Toffoli T (1980) Reversible computing. MIT Report MIT/LCS/TM-151

  3. Margolus N, Levitin L (1998) The maximum speed of dynamical evolution. Physica D 120:188–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Helstrom C (1976) Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fuchs C (1998) Just two nonorthogonal quantum states. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/9810032

  6. Hardy L (2001) Quantum theory from five reasonable axioms. http:// xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0101012

  7. Wootters W, Zurek W (1982) A single quantum bit can not be cloned. Nature 299:802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Janzing D, Beth T (2003) Quasi-order of clocks and their synchronism and quantum bounds for copying timing information. IEEE Trans Inform Theory 49(1):230–240

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Barnum H, Caves C, Fuchs C, Jozsa R, Schumacher B (1996) Noncommuting mixed states cannot be broadcast. Phys Rev Lett 76:2818–2821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bruss D, Cinchetti M, D’Ariano G, Machiavello C (2000) Phase covariant quantum cloning. Phys Rev A 62:12302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Janzing D, Beth T (2002) Are there quantum bounds on the recyclability of clock signals in low power computers? In: Proceedings of the DFG-Kolloquium VIVA, Chemnitz. See also LANL-preprint http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0202059

  12. Landauer R (1961) Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM J Res Dev 5:183–191

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Bennett C (1973) Logical reversibility of computation. IBM J Res Dev 17:525–532

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Devetak I (2003) The private classical capacity and quantum capacity of a quantum channel. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0304127

  15. Zurek WH (2003) Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical. Rev Mod Phys 75:715 (See also http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0105127)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Lazic D, Beth T, Geiselmann W, Wichmann P (2004) One-trial electromagetic attack on modular exponentiation. In: Proceedings of the 5th International ITG Conference on Source and Channel Coding (SCC), Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  17. Janzing D, Beth T (2003) Bounds on the entropy generated when timing information is extracted from microscopic systems. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0301125

  18. Benioff P (1980) The computer as a physical system: A microscopic quantum mechanical model of computers as represented by Turing machines. J Statist Phys 22(5):562–591

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Feynman R (1985) Quantum mechanical computers. Opt News 11:11–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Margolus N (1990) Parallel quantum computation. In: W Zurek (ed) Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information. Addison Wesley Longman, Redwood City, CA

    Google Scholar 

  21. Janzing D, Wocjan P (2005) Ergodic quantum computing. Quantum Inf Proc 4(2):129–158

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Janzing D, Beth T (2003) Synchronizing quantum clocks with classical one-way communication: Bounds on the generated entropy. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0306023v1

  23. Pearl J (2000) Causality. Cambridge University Press, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Heckermann D, Shachter R (1995) Decision-theoretic foundations for causal reasoning. J Artif Intell Res 3:405–30

    Google Scholar 

  25. Imbens G, Rubin D (1997) Bayesian inference for causal effects in randomized experiments with noncompliance. Ann Stat 25:305–27

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Janzing D, Beth T (2006) On the potential influnece of quantum noise on measuring effectiveness of drugs in clinical trials. Int J Quantum Inf 4(2):347–364

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Bennett C, Wiesner S (1992) Communication via one- and two-particle operators on Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen states. Phys Rev Lett 69(20):2881

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Bacon D, Toner B (2003) Bell inequalities with auxiliary communication. Phys Rev Lett 90:157904

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Zurek W (2003) Quantum Discord and Maxwell’s Demons. Phys Rev A 67:012320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Horodecki M, Horodecki P, Oppenheim J (2003) Reversible transformations from pure to mixed states, and the unique measure of information. Phys Rev A 67:062104

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Davies E (1976) Quantum theory of open systems. Academic Press, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Schulman L, Vazirani U (1998) Scalable NMR Quantum Computers. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/9804060

  33. Decker T, Janzing D, Beth T (2004) Quantum circuits for single-qubit measurements corresponding to platonic solids. Int J Quantum Inf 2(3):353–377

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Decker T, Janzing D, Rötteler M (2005) Implementation of group-covariant positive operator valued measures by orthogonal measurements. J Math Phys 46:012104

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Shor P (1997) Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM J Comput 26(5):1484–1509

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Wocjan P, Janzing D, Decker T, Beth T (2004) Measuring 4-local n-qubit observables could probabilistically solve PSPACE. In: Proceedings of the WISICT conference, Cancun. See also http:// xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0308011

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominik Janzing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Janzing, D. Quantum computing models as a tool box for controlling and understanding the nanoscopic world . Informatik Forsch. Entw. 21, 83–90 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-006-0013-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00450-006-0013-x

Keywords

Navigation