Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Quantum algorithms to simulate quadratic classical Hamiltonians and optimal control

Published 10 Apr 2024 in quant-ph and cs.CC | (2404.07303v1)

Abstract: Simulation of realistic classical mechanical systems is of great importance to many areas of engineering such as robotics, dynamics of rotating machinery and control theory. In this work, we develop quantum algorithms to estimate quantities of interest such as the kinetic energy in a given classical mechanical system in the presence of friction or damping as well as forcing or source terms, which makes the algorithm of practical interest. We show that for such systems, the quantum algorithm scales polynomially with the logarithm of the dimension of the system. We cast this problem in terms of Hamilton's equations of motion (equivalent to the first variation of the Lagrangian) and solve them using quantum algorithms for differential equations. We then consider the hardness of estimating the kinetic energy of a damped coupled oscillator system. We show that estimating the kinetic energy at a given time of this system to within additive precision is BQP hard when the strength of the damping term is bounded by an inverse polynomial in the number of qubits. We then consider the problem of designing optimal control of classical systems, which can be cast as the second variation of the Lagrangian. In this direction, we first consider the Riccati equation, which is a nonlinear differential equation ubiquitous in control theory. We give an efficient quantum algorithm to solve the Riccati differential equation well into the nonlinear regime. To our knowledge, this is the first example of any nonlinear differential equation that can be solved when the strength of the nonlinearity is asymptotically greater than the amount of dissipation. We then show how to use this algorithm to solve the linear quadratic regulator problem, which is an example of the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (57)
  1. A. Gilyén, Y. Su, G. H. Low, and N. Wiebe, “Quantum singular value transformation and beyond: Exponential improvements for quantum matrix arithmetics,” in Proceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2019, (New York, NY, USA), p. 193–204, Association for Computing Machinery, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313276.3316366.
  2. J. M. Martyn, Z. M. Rossi, A. K. Tan, and I. L. Chuang, “Grand unification of quantum algorithms,” PRX Quantum, vol. 2, p. 040203, Dec 2021.
  3. G. H. Low and Y. Su, “Quantum eigenvalue processing,” 2024.
  4. S. Lloyd, “Universal quantum simulators,” Science, vol. 273, no. 5278, pp. 1073–1078, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.273.5278.1073.
  5. D. W. Berry, G. Ahokas, R. Cleve, and B. C. Sanders, “Efficient quantum algorithms for simulating sparse Hamiltonians,” Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 270, p. 359–371, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-006-0150-x.
  6. G. H. Low and I. L. Chuang, “Optimal hamiltonian simulation by quantum signal processing,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 118, p. 010501, Jan 2017. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.010501.
  7. G. H. Low and I. L. Chuang, “Hamiltonian Simulation by Qubitization,” Quantum, vol. 3, p. 163, July 2019. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-07-12-163.
  8. S. Chakraborty, A. Gilyén, and S. Jeffery, “The Power of Block-Encoded Matrix Powers: Improved Regression Techniques via Faster Hamiltonian Simulation,” in 46th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2019) (C. Baier, I. Chatzigiannakis, P. Flocchini, and S. Leonardi, eds.), vol. 132 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), (Dagstuhl, Germany), pp. 33:1–33:14, Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2019.33.
  9. M. Kieferová, A. Scherer, and D. W. Berry, “Simulating the dynamics of time-dependent hamiltonians with a truncated dyson series,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 99, p. 042314, Apr 2019.
  10. D. W. Berry, A. M. Childs, Y. Su, X. Wang, and N. Wiebe, “Time-dependent Hamiltonian simulation with L1superscript𝐿1L^{1}italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT-norm scaling,” Quantum, vol. 4, p. 254, Apr. 2020. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2020-04-20-254.
  11. A. Kalev and I. Hen, “Quantum Algorithm for Simulating Hamiltonian Dynamics with an Off-diagonal Series Expansion,” Quantum, vol. 5, p. 426, Apr. 2021.
  12. A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, “Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 103, no. 15, p. 150502, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.150502.
  13. D. Dervovic, M. Herbster, P. Mountney, S. Severini, N. Usher, and L. Wossnig, “Quantum linear systems algorithms: a primer,” 2018.
  14. A. Ambainis, “Variable time amplitude amplification and quantum algorithms for linear algebra problems,” in 29th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2012) (C. Dürr and T. Wilke, eds.), vol. 14 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), (Dagstuhl, Germany), pp. 636–647, Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2012.636.
  15. A. M. Childs, R. Kothari, and R. D. Somma, “Quantum algorithm for systems of linear equations with exponentially improved dependence on precision,” SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1920–1950, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1137/16M1087072.
  16. P. C. Costa, D. An, Y. R. Sanders, Y. Su, R. Babbush, and D. W. Berry, “Optimal scaling quantum linear-systems solver via discrete adiabatic theorem,” PRX Quantum, vol. 3, p. 040303, Oct 2022. https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.040303.
  17. S. Lloyd, S. Garnerone, and P. Zanardi, “Quantum algorithms for topological and geometric analysis of data,” Nature Communications, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 10138, 2016.
  18. D. W. Berry, Y. Su, C. Gyurik, R. King, J. Basso, A. D. T. Barba, A. Rajput, N. Wiebe, V. Dunjko, and R. Babbush, “Analyzing prospects for quantum advantage in topological data analysis,” PRX Quantum, vol. 5, p. 010319, Feb 2024.
  19. S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, and P. Rebentrost, “Quantum principal component analysis,” Nature Physics, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 631–633, 2014.
  20. J. van Apeldoorn, A. Gilyén, S. Gribling, and R. de Wolf, “Quantum SDP-Solvers: Better upper and lower bounds,” Quantum, vol. 4, p. 230, Feb. 2020. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2020-02-14-230.
  21. C. Sünderhauf, E. Campbell, and J. Camps, “Block-encoding structured matrices for data input in quantum computing,” Quantum, vol. 8, p. 1226, Jan. 2024.
  22. B. D. Clader, A. M. Dalzell, N. Stamatopoulos, G. Salton, M. Berta, and W. J. Zeng, “Quantum resources required to block-encode a matrix of classical data,” IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 1–23, 2022.
  23. D. W. Berry, “High-order quantum algorithm for solving linear differential equations,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 47, no. 10, p. 105301, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/47/10/105301.
  24. D. W. Berry, A. M. Childs, A. Ostrander, and G. Wang, “Quantum algorithm for linear differential equations with exponentially improved dependence on precision,” Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 356, no. 3, pp. 1057–1081, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-017-3002-y.
  25. H. Krovi, “Improved quantum algorithms for linear and nonlinear differential equations,” 2022. arXiv:2202.01054.
  26. D. Fang, L. Lin, and Y. Tong, “Time-marching based quantum solvers for time-dependent linear differential equations,” 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2208.06941.
  27. D. W. Berry and P. C. S. Costa, “Quantum algorithm for time-dependent differential equations using dyson series,” 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.03544.
  28. D. An, A. M. Childs, and L. Lin, “Quantum algorithm for linear non-unitary dynamics with near-optimal dependence on all parameters,” 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.03916.
  29. D. An, J.-P. Liu, and L. Lin, “Linear combination of hamiltonian simulation for nonunitary dynamics with optimal state preparation cost,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 131, p. 150603, Oct 2023. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.150603.
  30. D. An, J.-P. Liu, D. Wang, and Q. Zhao, “A theory of quantum differential equation solvers: limitations and fast-forwarding,” 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.05246.
  31. S. Jin, N. Liu, and Y. Yu, “Quantum simulation of partial differential equations via schrodingerisation,” 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.13969.
  32. A. M. Dalzell, S. McArdle, M. Berta, P. Bienias, C.-F. Chen, A. Gilyén, C. T. Hann, M. J. Kastoryano, E. T. Khabiboulline, A. Kubica, G. Salton, S. Wang, and F. G. S. L. Brandão, “Quantum algorithms: A survey of applications and end-to-end complexities,” 2023.
  33. R. Babbush, D. W. Berry, R. Kothari, R. D. Somma, and N. Wiebe, “Exponential quantum speedup in simulating coupled classical oscillators,” 2023.
  34. J.-P. Liu, H. Ø. Kolden, H. K. Krovi, N. F. Loureiro, K. Trivisa, and A. M. Childs, “Efficient quantum algorithm for dissipative nonlinear differential equations,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118, no. 35, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2026805118.
  35. C. Xue, Y.-C. Wu, and G.-P. Guo, “Quantum homotopy perturbation method for nonlinear dissipative ordinary differential equations,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 23, p. 123035, dec 2021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/ac3eff.
  36. S. Lloyd, G. De Palma, C. Gokler, B. Kiani, Z.-W. Liu, M. Marvian, F. Tennie, and T. Palmer, “Quantum algorithm for nonlinear differential equations,” 2020. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2011.06571.
  37. A. M. Childs, J.-P. Liu, and A. Ostrander, “High-precision quantum algorithms for partial differential equations,” Quantum, vol. 5, p. 574, Nov. 2021. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-11-10-574.
  38. S. Jin and N. Liu, “Quantum algorithms for computing observables of nonlinear partial differential equations,” 2022.
  39. N. Linden, A. Montanaro, and C. Shao, “Quantum vs. classical algorithms for solving the heat equation,” Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 395, no. 2, pp. 601–641, 2022.
  40. D. Lewis, S. Eidenbenz, B. Nadiga, and Y. Subaşı, “Limitations for quantum algorithms to solve turbulent and chaotic systems,” 2023.
  41. A. S. Glasser, A. H. Glasser, R. Conlin, and E. Kolemen, “An ideal MHD W stability analysis that bypasses the Newcomb equation,” Physics of Plasmas, vol. 27, p. 022114, 02 2020.
  42. Dover Books on Mathematics, Dover Publications, 2000.
  43. D. Liberzon, Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control Theory: A Concise Introduction. Princeton University Press, 2012.
  44. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
  45. Addison Wesley, 2002.
  46. M. Friswell, Dynamics of Rotating Machines. Cambridge Aerospace Series, Cambridge University Press, 2010.
  47. P. Lancaster, “Stability of linear gyroscopic systems: A review,” Linear Algebra and its Applications, vol. 439, no. 3, pp. 686–706, 2013. Special Issue in Honor of Harm Bart.
  48. F. H. Clarke and V. Zeidan, “Sufficiency and the jacobi condition in the calculus of variations,” Canadian Journal of Mathematics, vol. 38, no. 5, p. 1199–1209, 1986.
  49. J. Schiff and S. Shnider, “A natural approach to the numerical integration of riccati differential equations,” SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 1392–1413, 1999.
  50. L. Hlavaty, S. Steinberg, and K. B. Wolf, “Riccati equations and lie series,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 246–263, 1984.
  51. W. Reid, Riccati Differential Equations. ISSN, Elsevier Science, 1972.
  52. B. Anderson and J. Moore, Optimal Control: Linear Quadratic Methods. Dover Books on Engineering, Dover Publications, 2007.
  53. R. Bhatia, Matrix Analysis. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer New York, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0653-8.
  54. T. Kato, Perturbation theory for linear operators. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
  55. Y. R. Sanders, G. H. Low, A. Scherer, and D. W. Berry, “Black-box quantum state preparation without arithmetic,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 122, p. 020502, Jan 2019.
  56. D. W. Berry, M. Kieferová, A. Scherer, Y. R. Sanders, G. H. Low, N. Wiebe, C. Gidney, and R. Babbush, “Improved techniques for preparing eigenstates of fermionic hamiltonians,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 22, 2018.
  57. Y. R. Sanders, D. W. Berry, P. C. Costa, L. W. Tessler, N. Wiebe, C. Gidney, H. Neven, and R. Babbush, “Compilation of fault-tolerant quantum heuristics for combinatorial optimization,” PRX Quantum, vol. 1, p. 020312, Nov 2020.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Authors (1)

  1. Hari Krovi 

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up