MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987091447 · doi:10.1145/1644015.1644034

Quantum algorithms for Simon's problem over nonabelian groups

2009· article· en· W1987091447 on OpenAlexaff
Gorjan Alagic, Cristopher Moore, Alexander Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Algorithms · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeDivision of Computing and Communication FoundationsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDihedral groupMathematicsQuantum algorithmCombinatoricsCosetTensor productDiscrete mathematicsGroup (periodic table)QuantumPure mathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Daniel Simon's 1994 discovery of an efficient quantum algorithm for finding “hidden shifts” of Z 2 n provided the first algebraic problem for which quantum computers are exponentially faster than their classical counterparts. In this article, we study the generalization of Simon's problem to arbitrary groups. Fixing a finite group G , this is the problem of recovering an involution m = ( m 1 ,…, m n ) ∈ G n from an oracle f with the property that f ( x ⋅ y ) = f ( x ) ⇔ y ∈ {1, m }. In the current parlance, this is the hidden subgroup problem (HSP) over groups of the form G n , where G is a nonabelian group of constant size, and where the hidden subgroup is either trivial or has order two. Although groups of the form G n have a simple product structure, they share important representation--theoretic properties with the symmetric groups S n , where a solution to the HSP would yield a quantum algorithm for Graph Isomorphism. In particular, solving their HSP with the so-called “standard method” requires highly entangled measurements on the tensor product of many coset states. In this article, we provide quantum algorithms with time complexity 2 O (√ n ) that recover hidden involutions m = ( m 1 ,… m n ) ∈ G n where, as in Simon's problem, each m i is either the identity or the conjugate of a known element m which satisfies κ( m ) = −κ(1) for some κ ∈ Ĝ . Our approach combines the general idea behind Kuperberg's sieve for dihedral groups with the “missing harmonic” approach of Moore and Russell. These are the first nontrivial HSP algorithms for group families that require highly entangled multiregister Fourier sampling.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on AlgorithmsSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207