Skip to main content
Download book PDF
View expanded cover

European Symposium on Programming

ESOP 2021: Programming Languages and Systems pp 148–177Cite as

An Automated Deductive Verification Framework for Circuit-building Quantum Programs

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNTCS,volume 12648)

Abstract

While recent progress in quantum hardware open the door for significant speedup in certain key areas, quantum algorithms are still hard to implement right, and the validation of such quantum programs is a challenge. In this paper we propose Qbricks, a formal verification environment for circuit-building quantum programs, featuring both parametric specifications and a high degree of proof automation. We propose a logical framework based on first-order logic, and develop the main tool we rely upon for achieving the automation of proofs of quantum specification: PPS, a parametric extension of the recently developed path sum semantics. To back-up our claims, we implement and verify parametric versions of several famous and non-trivial quantum algorithms, including the quantum parts of Shor’s integer factoring, quantum phase estimation (QPE) and Grover’s search.

Keywords

  • deductive verification
  • quantum programming
  • quantum circuits

Download conference paper PDF

References

  1. M. Amy. Formal Methods in Quantum Circuit Design. PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Amy. Towards large-scale functional verification of universal quantum circuits. In P. Selinger and G. Chiribella, editors, Proceedings 15th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic, QPL 2018, volume 287 of Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 1–21, Halifax, Canada, 2019. EPTCS.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. Amy, M. Roetteler, and K. M. Svore. Verified compilation of space-efficient reversible circuits. In R. Majumdar and V. Kuncak, editors, Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV 2017), Part II, volume 10427 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 3–21, Heidelberg, Germany, 2017. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  4. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell, et al. Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor. Nature, 574(7779):505–510, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Beauregard. Circuit for shor’s algorithm using 2n+ 3 qubits. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0205095, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  6. D. Bhattacharjee, M. Soeken, S. Dutta, A. Chattopadhyay, and G. D. Micheli. Reversible pebble games for reducing qubits in hierarchical quantum circuit synthesis. In Proceedings of the 49th IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic (ISMVL 2019), pages 102–107, Fredericton, NB, Canada, 2019. IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd. Quantum machine learning. Nature, 549(7671):195, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  8. B. Bichsel, M. Baader, T. Gehr, and M. T. Vechev. Silq: a high-level quantum language with safe uncomputation and intuitive semantics. In A. F. Donaldson and E. Torlak, editors, Proceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI 2020, London, UK, June 15-20, 2020, pages 286–300. ACM, 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  9. F. Bobot, J.-C. Filliâtre, C. Marché, and A. Paskevich. Why3: Shepherd Your Herd of Provers. In Proceedings of Boogie 2011: First International Workshop on Intermediate Verification Languages, Wroclaw, Poland, 53–64, 2011. Available online as hal-00790310.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Boender, F. Kammüller, and R. Nagarajan. Formalization of quantum protocols using coq. In C. Heunen, P. Selinger, and J. Vicary, editors, Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Quantum Physics and Logic (QPL 2015), volume 195 of Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 71–83, Oxford, UK, 2015. EPTCS.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Broadbent. How to verify a quantum computation. Theory of Computing, 14(1):1–37, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  12. T. Carette, D. Horsman, and S. Perdrix. SZX-calculus: Scalable graphical quantum reasoning. In P. Rossmanith, P. Heggernes, and J. Katoen, editors, 44th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, MFCS 2019, August 26-30, 2019, Aachen, Germany, volume 138 of LIPIcs, pages 55:1–55:15. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  13. C. Chareton, S. Bardin, F. Bobot, V. Perrelle, and B. Valiron. Toward certified quantum programming. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.05841, 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  14. I. L. Chuang, N. Gershenfeld, and M. Kubinec. Experimental implementation of fast quantum searching. Physical review letters, 80(15):3408, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. E. M. Clarke and J. M. Wing. Formal methods: State of the art and future directions. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 28(4):626–643, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. Cleve, A. Ekert, C. Macchiavello, and M. Mosca. Quantum algorithms revisited. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 454(1969):339–354, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  17. B. Coecke and A. Kissinger. Picturing quantum processes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Coppersmith. An approximate fourier transform useful in quantum factoring. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0201067, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  19. T. A. Davidson. Formal verification techniques using quantum process calculus. PhD thesis, University of Warwick, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  20. N. de Beaudrap, R. Duncan, D. Horsman, and S. Perdrix. Pauli fusion: a computational model to realise quantum transformations from ZX terms. Available online as arXiv:1904.12817, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Fagan and R. Duncan. Optimising Clifford circuits with Quantomatic. In P. Selinger and G. Chiribella, editors, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic (QPL 2018), volume 287 of Electronic Notes In Theoretical Computer Science, pages 85–105, Halifax, Canada, 2018. EPTCS.

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann. A quantum approximate optimization algorithm. Available online as arXiv:1411.4028, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  23. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, J. Lapan, A. Lundgren, and D. Preda. A quantum adiabatic evolution algorithm applied to random instances of an np-complete problem. Science, 292(5516):472–475, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. Filliâtre and C. Marché. The Why/Krakatoa/Caduceus platform for deductive program verification. In W. Damm and H. Hermanns, editors, Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV 2007), volume 4590 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 173–177, Berlin, Germany, 2007. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. Filliâtre and A. Paskevich. Why3 - where programs meet provers. In M. Felleisen and P. Gardner, editors, Proceedings of the 22nd European Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems (ESOP 2013), Held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2013), volume 7792 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 125–128, Rome, Italy, 2013. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J.-C. Filliâtre, L. Gondelman, and A. Paskevich. The spirit of ghost code. Formal Methods in System Design, 48(3):152–174, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  27. S. J. Gay, R. Nagarajan, and N. Papanikolaou. QMC: a model checker for quantum systems. In A. Gupta and S. Malik, editors, Proceeding of the 20th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV 2008), volume 5123 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 543–547, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2008. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  28. I. M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori. Quantum simulation. Reviews of Modern Physics, 86(1):153, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. Gheorghiu, T. Kapourniotis, and E. Kashefi. Verification of quantum computation: An overview of existing approaches. Theory of Computing Systems, 63(4):715–808, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. S. Green, P. L. Lumsdaine, N. J. Ross, P. Selinger, and B. Valiron. Quipper: A scalable quantum programming language. In H.-J. Boehm and C. Flanagan, editors, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, (PLDI’13), pages 333–342, Seattle, WA, USA, 2013. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  31. L. K. Grover. A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. In G. L. Miller, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 212–219, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 1996. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  32. W. Haaswijk, M. Soeken, A. Mishchenko, and G. De Micheli. SAT-based exact synthesis: Encodings, topology families, and parallelism. To apprear in IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, https://doi,org/10.1109/TCAD.2019.2897703, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  33. A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd. Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations. Physical Review Letters, 103:150502, Oct 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  34. K. Hietala, R. Rand, S.-H. Hung, L. Li, and M. Hicks. Proving quantum programs correct. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.01240, 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  35. K. Hietala, R. Rand, S.-H. Hung, X. Wu, and M. Hicks. A verified optimizer for quantum circuits. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, 5(POPL):1–29, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Y. Huang and M. Martonosi. QDB: from quantum algorithms towards correct quantum programs. In T. Barik, J. Sunshine, and S. Chasins, editors, Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Evaluation and Usability of Programming Languages and Tools (PLATEAU@SPLASH 2018), volume 67 of OpenAccess Series in Informatics (OASIcs), pages 4:1–4:14, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2018. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Y. Huang and M. Martonosi. Statistical assertions for validating patterns and finding bugs in quantum programs. In S. B. Manne, H. C. Hunter, and E. R. Altman, editors, Proceedings of the 46th International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA 2019), pages 541–553, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 2019. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  38. IBM Blog. On quantum supremacy. Blog Article (https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2019/10/on-quantum-supremacy/), 2019.

  39. A. Kissinger and J. van de Wetering. Reducing t-count with the ZX-calculus. Available online as arXiv:1903.10477, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  40. A. Kissinger and V. Zamdzhiev. Quantomatic: A proof assistant for diagrammatic reasoning. In A. P. Felty and A. Middeldorp, editors, Proceedings for the 25th International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-25), volume 9195 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 326–336, Berlin, Germany, 2015. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  41. A. Y. Kitaev. Quantum measurements and the abelian stabilizer problem. Available online as arXiv:quant-ph/9511026, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  42. E. Knill. Conventions for quantum pseudocode. Technical report, Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States), 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  43. U. D. Lago, A. Masini, and M. Zorzi. Quantum implicit computational complexity. Theoretical Computer Science, 411(2):377–409, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  44. G. Li, L. Zhou, N. Yu, Y. Ding, M. Ying, and Y. Xie. Projection-based runtime assertions for testing and debugging quantum programs. Proc. ACM Program. Lang., 4(OOPSLA):150:1–150:29, 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  45. J. Liu, B. Zhan, S. Wang, S. Ying, T. Liu, Y. Li, M. Ying, and N. Zhan. Formal verification of quantum algorithms using quantum hoare logic. In I. Dillig and S. Tasiran, editors, Computer Aided Verification, pages 187–207, Cham, 2019. Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  46. T. Liu, Y. Li, S. Wang, M. Ying, and N. Zhan. A theorem prover for quantum hoare logic and its applications. Available as arXiv:1601.03835, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  47. U. Mahadev. Classical verification of quantum computations. In M. Thorup, editor, Proceedings of the 59th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS 2018), pages 259–267, Paris, France, 2018. IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  48. G. Meuli, M. Soeken, M. Roetteler, and T. Häner. Enabling accuracy-aware quantum compilers using symbolic resource estimation. Proc. ACM Program. Lang., 4(OOPSLA), 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  49. R. Nagarajan and S. Gay. Formal verification of quantum protocols. Available online as arXiv:quant-ph/0203086, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  50. M. A. Nielsen and I. Chuang. Quantum computation and quantum information. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  51. L. Paolini, M. Piccolo, and M. Zorzi. qPCF: Higher-order languages and quantum circuits. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 63(4):941–966, Dec 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  52. A. Parent, M. Roetteler, and K. M. Svore. REVS: a tool for space-optimized reversible circuit synthesis. In I. Phillips and H. Rahaman, editors, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Reversible Computation (RC 2017), volume 10301 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 90–101, Kolkata, India, 2017. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  53. J. Paykin, R. Rand, and S. Zdancewic. QWIRE: a core language for quantum circuits. In G. Castagna and A. D. Gordon, editors, Proceedings of the 44th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL’17), pages 846–858, Paris, France, 2017. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Qbricks repository. https://cchareton.github.io/Qbricks.

  55. Quantum Computing Report. List of tools. Available online (https://quantumcomputingreport.com/resources/tools/), 2019.

  56. R. Rand. Formally Verified Quantum Programming. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  57. R. Rand, J. Paykin, D. Lee, and S. Zdancewic. ReQWIRE: Reasoning about reversible quantum circuits. In P. Selinger and G. Chiribella, editors, Proceedings 15th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic (QPL 2018), volume 287 of Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 299–312, Halifax, Canada, 2018. EPTCS.

    Google Scholar 

  58. R. Rand, J. Paykin, and S. Zdancewic. QWIRE practice: Formal verification of quantum circuits in coq. In B. Coecke and A. Kissinger, editors, Proceedings 14th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic (QPL 2017), volume 266 of Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 119–132, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 2017. EPTCS.

    Google Scholar 

  59. N. J. Ross. Algebraic and Logical Methods in Quantum Computation. PhD thesis, Dalhousie University, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  60. P. Selinger and B. Valiron. A lambda calculus for quantum computation with classical control. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 16:527–552, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  61. P. W. Shor. Algorithms for quantum computation: Discrete log and factoring. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’94), pages 124–134, Santa Fe, New Mexico, US., 1994. IEEE, IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  62. M. Soeken, T. Häner, and M. Roetteler. Programming quantum computers using design automation. Available online as arXiv:1803.01022, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  63. D. S. Steiger, T. Häner, and M. Troyer. ProjectQ: an open source software framework for quantum computing. Quantum, 2:49, Jan. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  64. K. M. Svore, A. Geller, M. Troyer, J. Azariah, C. Granade, B. Heim, V. Kliuchnikov, M. Mykhailova, A. Paz, and M. Roetteler. Q#: Enabling scalable quantum computing and development with a high-level domain-specific language. Available online as arXiv:1803.00652, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  65. K. M. Svore and M. Troyer. The quantum future of computation. IEEE Computer, 49(9):21–030, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  66. B. Valiron, N. J. Ross, P. Selinger, D. S. Alexander, and J. M. Smith. Programming the quantum future. Communications of the ACM, 58(8):52–61, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  67. D. Wecker and K. M. Svore. LIQUi\(|\rangle \): A software design architecture and domain-specific language for quantum computing. Available online as arXiv:1402.4467, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  68. M. Ying. Floyd-hoare logic for quantum programs. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), 33(6):19:1–19:49, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  69. M. Ying. Toward automatic verification of quantum programs. Formal Aspects of Computing, 31(1):3–25, 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  70. M. Ying, Y. Li, N. Yu, and Y. Feng. Model-checking linear-time properties of quantum systems. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 15(3):22:1–22:31, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  71. M. Ying, S. Ying, and X. Wu. Invariants of quantum programs: characterisations and generation. In Proceedings of the 44th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 2017), pages 818–832, Paris, France, 2017. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the French National Research Agency (ANR) under the research project SoftQPRO ANR17-CE25-0009-02, and by the DGE of the French Ministry of Industry under the research project PIA-GDN/QuantEx P163746- 484124.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LMF, CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France

    Christophe Chareton & Benoît Valiron

  2. CEA, LIST, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, France

    Christophe Chareton, Sébastien Bardin, François Bobot & Valentin Perrelle

Authors
  1. Christophe Chareton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sébastien Bardin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. François Bobot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Valentin Perrelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Benoît Valiron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christophe Chareton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Imperial College, London, UK

    Nobuko Yoshida

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Chareton, C., Bardin, S., Bobot, F., Perrelle, V., Valiron, B. (2021). An Automated Deductive Verification Framework for Circuit-building Quantum Programs. In: Yoshida, N. (eds) Programming Languages and Systems. ESOP 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12648. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72019-3_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72019-3_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72018-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-72019-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)