Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Dimension reduction in quantum sampling of stochastic processes

Published 16 Apr 2024 in quant-ph | (2404.10338v1)

Abstract: Quantum technologies offer a promising route to the efficient sampling and analysis of stochastic processes, with potential applications across the sciences. Such quantum advantages rely on the preparation of a quantum sample state of the stochastic process, which requires a memory system to propagate correlations between the past and future of the process. Here, we introduce a method of lossy quantum dimension reduction that allows this memory to be compressed, not just beyond classical limits, but also beyond current state-of-the-art quantum stochastic sampling approaches. We investigate the trade-off between the saving in memory resources from this compression, and the distortion it introduces. We show that our approach can be highly effective in low distortion compression of both Markovian and strongly non-Markovian processes alike. We further discuss the application of our results to quantum stochastic modelling more broadly.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (52)
  1. D. T. Gillespie, Stochastic simulation of chemical kinetics, Annual Reviews of Physical Chemistry 58, 35 (2007).
  2. D. J. Wilkinson, Stochastic modelling for quantitative description of heterogeneous biological systems, Nature Reviews Genetics 10, 122 (2009).
  3. E. Garavaglia and R. Pavani, About earthquake forecasting by Markov renewal processes, Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability 13, 155 (2011).
  4. J. Bulla and I. Bulla, Stylized facts of financial time series and hidden semi-Markov models, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 51, 2192 (2006).
  5. S. Maerivoet and B. De Moor, Cellular automata models of road traffic, Physics reports 419, 1 (2005).
  6. S. E. Levinson, Continuously variable duration hidden Markov models for automatic speech recognition, Computer Speech & Language 1, 29 (1986).
  7. L. R. Rabiner, A Tutorial on Hidden Markov Models and Selected Applications in Speech Recognition, Proceedings of the IEEE 77, 257 (1989).
  8. W. K. Hastings, Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications, Biometrika 57, 97 (1970), https://academic.oup.com/biomet/article-pdf/57/1/97/23940249/57-1-97.pdf .
  9. W. R. Gilks, S. Richardson, and D. Spiegelhalter, Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice (CRC press, 1995).
  10. R. Y. Rubinstein and D. P. Kroese, Simulation and the Monte Carlo method, Vol. 10 (John Wiley & Sons, 2016).
  11. C. Blank, D. K. Park, and F. Petruccione, Quantum-enhanced analysis of discrete stochastic processes, npj Quantum Information 7, 1 (2021).
  12. P. Rebentrost, B. Gupt, and T. R. Bromley, Quantum computational finance: Monte carlo pricing of financial derivatives, Physical Review A 98, 022321 (2018).
  13. S. Woerner and D. J. Egger, Quantum risk analysis, npj Quantum Information 5, 1 (2019).
  14. T. J. Elliott, Quantum coarse graining for extreme dimension reduction in modeling stochastic temporal dynamics, PRX Quantum 2, 020342 (2021a).
  15. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum random access memory, Physical Review Letters 100, 160501 (2008), arXiv:0708.1879 [quant-ph] .
  16. A. N. Chowdhury, G. H. Low, and N. Wiebe, A Variational Quantum Algorithm for Preparing Quantum Gibbs States (2020), arXiv:2002.00055 [quant-ph] .
  17. F. C. Binder, J. Thompson, and M. Gu, Practical unitary simulator for non-Markovian complex processes, Physical Review Letters 120, 240502 (2018).
  18. R. Orús, A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states, Annals of physics 349, 117 (2014).
  19. J. P. Crutchfield, Between order and chaos, Nature Physics 8, 17 (2012).
  20. A. Khintchine, Korrelationstheorie der stationären stochastischen Prozesse, Mathematische Annalen 109, 604 (1934).
  21. C. R. Shalizi and J. P. Crutchfield, Computational mechanics: Pattern and prediction, structure and simplicity, Journal of Statistical Physics 104, 817 (2001).
  22. J. P. Crutchfield and K. Young, Inferring statistical complexity, Physical Review Letters 63, 105 (1989).
  23. J. R. Mahoney, C. Aghamohammadi, and J. P. Crutchfield, Occam’s Quantum Strop: Synchronizing and Compressing Classical Cryptic Processes via a Quantum Channel, Scientific Reports 6, 20495 (2016), arXiv:1508.02760 .
  24. C. Aghamohammadi, J. R. Mahoney, and J. P. Crutchfield, Extreme Quantum Advantage when Simulating Classical Systems with Long-Range Interaction, Scientific Reports 7, 6735 (2017), arXiv:1609.03650 .
  25. T. J. Elliott and M. Gu, Superior memory efficiency of quantum devices for the simulation of continuous-time stochastic processes, npj Quantum Information 4, 18 (2018).
  26. T. J. Elliott, A. J. P. Garner, and M. Gu, Memory-efficient tracking of complex temporal and symbolic dynamics with quantum simulators, New Journal of Physics 21, 013021 (2019).
  27. M. Fannes, B. Nachtergaele, and R. F. Werner, Finitely correlated states on quantum spin chains, Communications in Mathematical Physics 144, 443 (1992).
  28. R. Orús and G. Vidal, Infinite time-evolving block decimation algorithm beyond unitary evolution, Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 78, 155117 (2008), arXiv:0711.3960 .
  29. F. Verstraete and J. I. Cirac, Matrix product states represent ground states faithfully, Phys. Rev. B 73, 094423 (2006).
  30. G. Vidal, Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations, Physical review letters 91, 147902 (2003).
  31. S. R. White and A. E. Feiguin, Real-time evolution using the density matrix renormalization group, Physical review letters 93, 076401 (2004).
  32. L. Vanderstraeten, J. Haegeman, and F. Verstraete, Tangent-space methods for uniform matrix product states, SciPost Physics Lecture Notes  (2019).
  33. An injective iMPS is one for which the transfer matrix \sum@⁢\slimits@x⁢Ax⊗(Ax)*tensor-product\sum@subscript\slimits@𝑥superscript𝐴𝑥superscriptsuperscript𝐴𝑥\sum@\slimits@_{x}A^{x}\otimes(A^{x})^{*}start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT * end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT has a non-degenerate leading eigenvalue of 1. The q-sample of an ergodic stochastic process corresponds to an injective iMPS representation.
  34. This can be achieved using a Gram-Schmidt procedure [29].
  35. R. J. Baxter, Exactly solved models in statistical mechanics (Elsevier, 2016).
  36. F. J. Dyson, Existence of a phase-transition in a one-dimensional ising ferromagnet, Communications in Mathematical Physics 12, 91 (1969).
  37. T. J. Elliott, Memory compression and thermal efficiency of quantum implementations of nondeterministic hidden Markov models, Physical Review A 103, 052615 (2021b).
  38. T. J. Elliott and M. Gu, Embedding memory-efficient stochastic simulators as quantum trajectories, Physical Review A 109, 022434 (2024).
  39. L. Banchi, Accuracy vs memory advantage in the quantum simulation of stochastic processes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.13473  (2023).
  40. Y. Hieida, Application of the density matrix renormalization group method to a non-equilibrium problem, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 67, 369 (1998).
  41. E. Carlon, M. Henkel, and U. Schollwöck, Density matrix renormalization group and reaction-diffusion processes, The European Physical Journal B-Condensed Matter and Complex Systems 12, 99 (1999).
  42. T. H. Johnson, S. R. Clark, and D. Jaksch, Dynamical simulations of classical stochastic systems using matrix product states, Physical Review E 82, 036702 (2010).
  43. W. Merbis, C. de Mulatier, and P. Corboz, Efficient simulations of epidemic models with tensor networks: Application to the one-dimensional susceptible-infected-susceptible model, Physical Review E 108, 024303 (2023).
  44. A. Monras, A. Beige, and K. Wiesner, Hidden quantum markov models and non-adaptive read-out of many-body states, Applied Mathematical and Computational Sciences 3, 93 (2011).
  45. M. Kliesch, D. Gross, and J. Eisert, Matrix-product operators and states: Np-hardness and undecidability, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 160503 (2014).
  46. E. Stoudenmire and D. J. Schwab, Supervised learning with tensor networks, Advances in neural information processing systems 29 (2016).
  47. E. M. Stoudenmire, Learning relevant features of data with multi-scale tensor networks, Quantum Science and Technology 3, 034003 (2018).
  48. S. R. Clark, Unifying neural-network quantum states and correlator product states via tensor networks, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 51, 135301 (2018).
  49. J.-G. Liu and L. Wang, Differentiable learning of quantum circuit born machines, Physical Review A 98, 062324 (2018).
  50. I. Guyon and A. Elisseeff, An introduction to feature extraction, in Feature extraction: foundations and applications (Springer, 2006) pp. 1–25.
  51. S. Khalid, T. Khalil, and S. Nasreen, A survey of feature selection and feature extraction techniques in machine learning, in 2014 science and information conference (IEEE, 2014) pp. 372–378.
  52. T. M. Cover, Elements of information theory (John Wiley & Sons, 1999).

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate All Videos Subscribe on YouTube

Whiteboard

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

Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

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

Generate Now

Continue Learning

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

Generate Now

Collections

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

Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 1 like about this paper.

Sign Up for Free