Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ktprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T23:14:38.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The quantum walk search algorithm: factors affecting efficiency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2018

NEIL B. LOVETT ,
MATTHEW EVERITT ,
ROBERT M. HEATH  and
VIV KENDON
NEIL B. LOVETT
Affiliation:
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom and Institute for Quantum Information Science, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada
MATTHEW EVERITT
Affiliation:
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom
ROBERT M. HEATH
Affiliation:
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9JT, United Kingdom Email: Robert.Heath@glasgow.ac.uk
VIV KENDON
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, United Kingdom Email: viv.kendon@durham.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We carry out a numerical study of the quantum walk search algorithm of Shenvi, Kempe and Whaley Shenvi et al. (2003) and the factors that affect its efficiency in finding an individual state from an unsorted set. Previous work has focused purely on the effects of the dimensionality of the dataset to be searched. In the current paper we consider the effects of interpolating between dimensions, the connectivity of the dataset and the possibility of disorder in the underlying substrate: all these factors affect the efficiency of the search algorithm. We show that in addition to the strong dependence on the spatial dimension of the structure to be searched, there are also secondary dependencies on the connectivity and symmetry of the lattice, with greater connectivity providing a more efficient algorithm. We also show that the algorithm can tolerate a non-trivial level of disorder in the underlying substrate.

Information

Type
Paper
Information
Mathematical Structures in Computer Science , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , March 2019 , pp. 389 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Unfortunately there has been an unintended delay in the publication of this article. Cambridge University Press apologises for the delay.

*

Neil Lovett was funded by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

Viv Kendon was funded by a UK Royal Society University Research Fellowship.

§

Robert Heath's current address is School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, United Kingdom.

References

Aaronson, S. and Ambainis, A. (2003) Quantum search of spatial regions. In: Proceedings of the 44th annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS) 200–209.Google Scholar
Abal, G., Donangelo, R., Marquezino, F. L. and Portugal, R. (2010) Spatial search in a honeycomb network. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 20 999–1009.Google Scholar
Abal, G., Donangelo, R., Marquezino, F. L., Oliveira, A. C. and Portugal, R. (2009) Decoherence in Search Algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 29th Brazilian computer society congress (SEMISH) 293–306.Google Scholar
Aharonov, D., Ambainis, A., Kempe, J. and Vazirani, U. (2001) Quantum walks on graphs. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC) 50–59.Google Scholar
Ambainis, A. (2003) Quantum walks and their algorithmic applications. International Journal of Quantum Information 1 507–518.Google Scholar
Ambainis, A. (2004) Quantum walk algorithm for element distinctness. In: Proceedings of the 45th annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS) 22–31.Google Scholar
Ambainis, A., Bach, E., Nayak, A., Vishwanath, A. and Watrous, J. (2001) One-dimensional quantum walks. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC) 37–49.Google Scholar
Ambainis, A., Backurs, A., Nahimovs, N., Ozols, R. and Rivosh, A. (2013) Theory of quantum computation, communication and cryptography. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7582 87–97.Google Scholar
Ambainis, A., Kempe, J. and Rivosh, A. (2005) Coins make quantum walks faster. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual ACM–SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms (SODA) 1099–1108.Google Scholar
Benioff, P. (2002) Space searches with a quantum robot. In: Quantum Computation and Information. Contemporary Mathematics 305 1–12.Google Scholar
Bernstein, E., Bennett, C., Brassard, G. and Vazirani, U. (1997) Strengths and weaknesses of quantum computing. SIAM Journal of Computing 26 1510–1523.Google Scholar
Brassard, G., Høyer, P., Mosca, M. and Tapp, A. (2002) Quantum amplitude amplification and estimation. In: Quantum Computation and Information. Contemporary Mathematics 305 53–74.Google Scholar
Buhrman, H. and Spalek, R. (2004) Quantum verification of matrix products. In: Proceedings of the 17th annual ACM–SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms (SODA) 880–889.Google Scholar
Childs, A. M. (2009) Universal computation by quantum walk. Physical Review Letters 102 180501.Google Scholar
Childs, A. M. and Goldstone, J. (2004a) Spatial search by quantum walk. Physical Review A 70 22314.Google Scholar
Childs, A. M. and Goldstone, J. (2004b) Spatial search and the Dirac equation. Physical Review A 70 42312.Google Scholar
Djordjevic, Z. V., Stanley, H. E. and Margolina, A. (1982) Site percolation threshold for honeycomb and square lattices. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 15 L405.Google Scholar
Farhi, E. and Gutmann, S. (1998) Quantum computation and decision trees. Physical Review A 58 915–928.Google Scholar
Gebele, T. (1984) Site percolation threshold for square lattice. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 17 L51.Google Scholar
Gottlieb, A. D. (2005) Convergence of continuous-time quantum walks on the line. Physical Review E 72 47102.Google Scholar
Grimmett, G., Janson, S. and Scudo, P. F. (2004) Weak limits for quantum random walks. Physical Review E 69 26119.Google Scholar
Grover, L. K. (1996) A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. Proceedings of the 28th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC) 212–219.Google Scholar
Hein, B. and Tanner, G. (2009) Quantum search algorithms on the hypercube. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 42 085303.Google Scholar
Hein, B. and Tanner, G. (2010) Quantum search algorithms on a regular lattice. Physical Review A 82 12326.Google Scholar
Inui, N., Konishi, Y. and Konno, N. (2004) Localization of two-dimensional quantum walks. Physical Review A 69 (5) 052323.Google Scholar
Keating, J. P., Linden, N., Matthews, J. C. F. and Winter, A. (2007) Localization and its consequences for quantum walk algorithms and quantum communication. Physical Review A 76 12315.Google Scholar
Kempe, J. (2003a) Quantum random walks hit exponentially faster. In: Arora, S., Jansen, K., Rolim, J. D. P. and Sahai, A. (eds.) Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization – Proceedings of RANDOM 2003. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2764 354–369.Google Scholar
Kempe, J. (2003b) Quantum random walks: an introductory overview. Contemporary Physics 44 307–327.Google Scholar
Kendon, V. (2003) Quantum walks on general graphs. International Journal of Quantum Information 4 791–805.Google Scholar
Kendon, V. (2007) Decoherence in quantum walks – a review. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 17 1169–1220.Google Scholar
Kendon, V. and Tregenna, B. (2003) Decoherence can be useful in quantum walks. Physical Review A 67 42315.Google Scholar
Kendon, V., Leung, G., Bailey, J. and Knott, P. (2011) Fractional scaling of quantum walks on percolation lattices. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 286 012053.Google Scholar
Krovi, H. and Brun, T. A. (2006a) Hitting time for quantum walks on the hypercube. Physical Review A 73 32341.Google Scholar
Krovi, H. and Brun, T. A. (2006b) Quantum walks with infinite hitting times. Physical Review A 74 42334.Google Scholar
Krovi, H. and Brun, T. A. (2007) Quantum walks on quotient graphs. Physical Review A 75 62332.Google Scholar
Krovi, H., Magniez, F., Ozols, M. and Roland, J. (2010) Finding is as easy as detecting for quantum walks. Automata, Languages and Programming 540–551.Google Scholar
Leung, G., Knott, P., Bailey, J. and Kendon, V. (2010) Coined quantum walks on percolation graphs. New Journal of Physics 12 123018.Google Scholar
Lovett, N. B., Cooper, S., Everitt, M., Trevers, M. and Kendon, V. (2010) Universal quantum computation using the discrete-time quantum walk. Physical Review A 81 42330.Google Scholar
Lovett, N., Everitt, M., Trevers, M., Mosby, D., Stockton, D. and Kendon, V. (2011) Spatial search using the discrete time quantum walk. Natural Computing 11 (1) 23–35.Google Scholar
Mackay, T. D., Bartlett, S. D., Stephenson, L. T. and Sanders, B. C. (2002) Quantum walks in higher dimensions. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 35 2745.Google Scholar
Magniez, F. and Nayak, A. (2005) Quantum complexity of testing group commutativity. In: Caires, L., Italiano, G. F., Monteiro, L., Palamidessi, C. and Yung, M. (eds.) Automata, Languages and Programming – Proceedings 32nd International Colloquium, ICALP 2005. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3580 1312–1324.Google Scholar
Magniez, F., Nayak, A., Richter, P. C. and Santha, M. (2009) On the hitting times of quantum versus random walks. In: Proceedings of the 20th annual ACM–SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms (SODA) 86–95.Google Scholar
Magniez, F., Nayak, A., Roland, J. and Santha, M. (2007) Search via quantum walk. In: Proceedings of the 39th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC) 575–584.Google Scholar
Magniez, F., Santha, M. and Szegedy, M. (2005) Quantum algorithms for the triangle problem. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual ACM–SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms (SODA) 1109–1117.Google Scholar
Marquezino, F. L., Portugal, R. and Abal, G. (2010) Mixing Times in Quantum Walks on Two-Dimensional Grids. Physical Review A 82 042341.Google Scholar
Moore, C. and Russell, A. (2002) Quantum walks on the hypercube. In: Rolim, J. D. P. and Vadhan, S. (eds.) Proceedings of 6th international workshop on randomization and approximation techniques in computer science (RANDOM 2002). Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2483 164–178.Google Scholar
Nayak, A. and Vishwanath, A. (2000) Quantum walk on the line. DIMACS Technical Report 2000-43. Arxiv preprint arXiv:0010117.Google Scholar
Patel, A. and Rahaman, Md. A. (2010) Search on a Hypercubic Lattice through a Quantum Random Walk I: d > 2. Physical Review A 82 032330.+2.+Physical+Review+A+82+032330.>Google Scholar
Patel, A., Raghunathan, K. S. and Rahaman, Md. A. (2010) Search on a Hypercubic Lattice through a Quantum Random Walk II: d = 2. Physical Review A 82 032331.Google Scholar
Potoček, V., Gábris, A., Kiss, T. and Jex, I. (2009) Optimized quantum random-walk search algorithms on the hypercube. Physical Review A 79 12325.Google Scholar
Reitzner, D., Hillery, M., Feldman, E. and Bužek, V. (2009) Quantum searches on highly symmetric graphs. Physical Review A 79 12323.Google Scholar
Santha, M. (2008) Quantum walk based search algorithms. In: Agrawal, M., Du, D., Duan, Z. and Li, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Models of Computation – Proceedings 5th International Conference, TAMC 2008. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4978 31–46.Google Scholar
Santos, R. A. M. and Portugal, R. (2010) Quantum Hitting Time on the Complete Graph. International Journal of Quantum Information 8 (5) 881–894.Google Scholar
Shenvi, N., Kempe, J. and Whaley, K. B. (2003) A quantum random-walk search algorithm. Physical Review A 67 52307.Google Scholar
Stauffer, D. and Aharony, A. (1992) Introduction to percolation theory, Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Szegedy, M. (2004) Quantum Speed-Up of Markov Chain Based Algorithms. In: Proceedings of 45th annual IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS) 32–41.Google Scholar
Tregenna, B., Flanagan, W., Maile, R. and Kendon, V. (2003) Controlling discrete quantum walks: coins and initial states. New Journal of Physics 5 83.Google Scholar
Tulsi, A. (2008) Faster quantum-walk algorithm for the two-dimensional spatial search. Physical Review A 78 12310.Google Scholar
Underwood, M. S. and Feder, D. L. (2010) Universal quantum computation by discontinuous quantum walk. Physical Review A 82 042304.Google Scholar
Zalka, C. (1999) Grover's quantum searching algorithm is optimal. Physical Review A 60 2746–2751.Google Scholar