How to describe, or encode, the input vector x of Quantum Fourier Transform?











up vote
5
down vote

favorite












Firstly, I'd like to specify my goal: to know why QFT runs exponentially faster than classical FFT.
I have read many tutorials about QFT (Quantum Fourier Transform), and this tutorial somehow explains something important between classical and quantum Fourier Transform.



Inside 1, it describes that:




The quantum Fourier transform is based on essentially the same idea with the only difference that the vectors x and y are state vectors (see formula 5.2, 5.3),




formulas 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 from the mentioined pdf file



However, I couldn't catch up the statement regarding "x and y are state vectors"; I get stuck at the formula 5.2 and 5.3.
I want to know how to convert the classical input vector x to the right hand side of the formula 5.2.
If this confusing problem is solved, it'll be better for me to understand the time complexity issue of QFT.










share|improve this question









New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 2




    Related: Why can the Discrete Fourier Transform be implemented efficiently as a quantum circuit?
    – Blue
    yesterday















up vote
5
down vote

favorite












Firstly, I'd like to specify my goal: to know why QFT runs exponentially faster than classical FFT.
I have read many tutorials about QFT (Quantum Fourier Transform), and this tutorial somehow explains something important between classical and quantum Fourier Transform.



Inside 1, it describes that:




The quantum Fourier transform is based on essentially the same idea with the only difference that the vectors x and y are state vectors (see formula 5.2, 5.3),




formulas 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 from the mentioined pdf file



However, I couldn't catch up the statement regarding "x and y are state vectors"; I get stuck at the formula 5.2 and 5.3.
I want to know how to convert the classical input vector x to the right hand side of the formula 5.2.
If this confusing problem is solved, it'll be better for me to understand the time complexity issue of QFT.










share|improve this question









New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 2




    Related: Why can the Discrete Fourier Transform be implemented efficiently as a quantum circuit?
    – Blue
    yesterday













up vote
5
down vote

favorite









up vote
5
down vote

favorite











Firstly, I'd like to specify my goal: to know why QFT runs exponentially faster than classical FFT.
I have read many tutorials about QFT (Quantum Fourier Transform), and this tutorial somehow explains something important between classical and quantum Fourier Transform.



Inside 1, it describes that:




The quantum Fourier transform is based on essentially the same idea with the only difference that the vectors x and y are state vectors (see formula 5.2, 5.3),




formulas 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 from the mentioined pdf file



However, I couldn't catch up the statement regarding "x and y are state vectors"; I get stuck at the formula 5.2 and 5.3.
I want to know how to convert the classical input vector x to the right hand side of the formula 5.2.
If this confusing problem is solved, it'll be better for me to understand the time complexity issue of QFT.










share|improve this question









New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











Firstly, I'd like to specify my goal: to know why QFT runs exponentially faster than classical FFT.
I have read many tutorials about QFT (Quantum Fourier Transform), and this tutorial somehow explains something important between classical and quantum Fourier Transform.



Inside 1, it describes that:




The quantum Fourier transform is based on essentially the same idea with the only difference that the vectors x and y are state vectors (see formula 5.2, 5.3),




formulas 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 from the mentioined pdf file



However, I couldn't catch up the statement regarding "x and y are state vectors"; I get stuck at the formula 5.2 and 5.3.
I want to know how to convert the classical input vector x to the right hand side of the formula 5.2.
If this confusing problem is solved, it'll be better for me to understand the time complexity issue of QFT.







quantum-algorithms quantum-fourier-transform






share|improve this question









New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Blue

5,60511250




5,60511250






New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









user3176354

261




261




New contributor




user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






user3176354 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 2




    Related: Why can the Discrete Fourier Transform be implemented efficiently as a quantum circuit?
    – Blue
    yesterday














  • 2




    Related: Why can the Discrete Fourier Transform be implemented efficiently as a quantum circuit?
    – Blue
    yesterday








2




2




Related: Why can the Discrete Fourier Transform be implemented efficiently as a quantum circuit?
– Blue
yesterday




Related: Why can the Discrete Fourier Transform be implemented efficiently as a quantum circuit?
– Blue
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote













You don't convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). The r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2) is something you get as the output of a preceding quantum computation as a quantum state, such as in Shor's algorithm. This is the only way to get an exponential speedup -- if you had to start from an exponentially big classical vector, there would be no way to solve this in polynomial time.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
    – Norbert Schuch
    yesterday


















up vote
2
down vote













Formula 5.2 refers to an encoding we call amplitude encoding. Imagine you have a vector $x$ with components $x_i$, the components are then encoded as amplitudes of a quantum state.



This encoding is very important as a vector that has a dimension $N$, will be encoded in quantum form using about $log(N)$ qubits. This is the main reason why in many quantum algorithms using this encoding we can achieve exponential speedup in the size of the problem.



However, generally in quantum computing, you have to assume that this encoding is done using a device called quantum random access memory for loading in this form a vector. Or you are given a circuit that do the job for you.






share|improve this answer























  • Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
    – cnada
    yesterday











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "694"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});






user3176354 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquantumcomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f4769%2fhow-to-describe-or-encode-the-input-vector-x-of-quantum-fourier-transform%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
3
down vote













You don't convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). The r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2) is something you get as the output of a preceding quantum computation as a quantum state, such as in Shor's algorithm. This is the only way to get an exponential speedup -- if you had to start from an exponentially big classical vector, there would be no way to solve this in polynomial time.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
    – Norbert Schuch
    yesterday















up vote
3
down vote













You don't convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). The r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2) is something you get as the output of a preceding quantum computation as a quantum state, such as in Shor's algorithm. This is the only way to get an exponential speedup -- if you had to start from an exponentially big classical vector, there would be no way to solve this in polynomial time.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
    – Norbert Schuch
    yesterday













up vote
3
down vote










up vote
3
down vote









You don't convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). The r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2) is something you get as the output of a preceding quantum computation as a quantum state, such as in Shor's algorithm. This is the only way to get an exponential speedup -- if you had to start from an exponentially big classical vector, there would be no way to solve this in polynomial time.






share|improve this answer












You don't convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). The r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2) is something you get as the output of a preceding quantum computation as a quantum state, such as in Shor's algorithm. This is the only way to get an exponential speedup -- if you had to start from an exponentially big classical vector, there would be no way to solve this in polynomial time.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered yesterday









Norbert Schuch

1,092211




1,092211












  • Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
    – Norbert Schuch
    yesterday


















  • Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
    – Norbert Schuch
    yesterday
















Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
– user3176354
yesterday




Thank you for your answer. But I'm still confused; according to the referenced pdf/website, the author says something between formula 5.3 and 5.4 in a way that makes want to think that we convert a classical input to the r.h.s. of Eq. (5.2). What the author says between formula 5.3 and 5.4 is " Then the action on the components of state vector x is described by 5.1 so that".
– user3176354
yesterday












@user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
– Norbert Schuch
yesterday




@user3176354 In the formulation you quote, there is nothing saying that this is converted to classical.
– Norbert Schuch
yesterday












up vote
2
down vote













Formula 5.2 refers to an encoding we call amplitude encoding. Imagine you have a vector $x$ with components $x_i$, the components are then encoded as amplitudes of a quantum state.



This encoding is very important as a vector that has a dimension $N$, will be encoded in quantum form using about $log(N)$ qubits. This is the main reason why in many quantum algorithms using this encoding we can achieve exponential speedup in the size of the problem.



However, generally in quantum computing, you have to assume that this encoding is done using a device called quantum random access memory for loading in this form a vector. Or you are given a circuit that do the job for you.






share|improve this answer























  • Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
    – cnada
    yesterday















up vote
2
down vote













Formula 5.2 refers to an encoding we call amplitude encoding. Imagine you have a vector $x$ with components $x_i$, the components are then encoded as amplitudes of a quantum state.



This encoding is very important as a vector that has a dimension $N$, will be encoded in quantum form using about $log(N)$ qubits. This is the main reason why in many quantum algorithms using this encoding we can achieve exponential speedup in the size of the problem.



However, generally in quantum computing, you have to assume that this encoding is done using a device called quantum random access memory for loading in this form a vector. Or you are given a circuit that do the job for you.






share|improve this answer























  • Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
    – cnada
    yesterday













up vote
2
down vote










up vote
2
down vote









Formula 5.2 refers to an encoding we call amplitude encoding. Imagine you have a vector $x$ with components $x_i$, the components are then encoded as amplitudes of a quantum state.



This encoding is very important as a vector that has a dimension $N$, will be encoded in quantum form using about $log(N)$ qubits. This is the main reason why in many quantum algorithms using this encoding we can achieve exponential speedup in the size of the problem.



However, generally in quantum computing, you have to assume that this encoding is done using a device called quantum random access memory for loading in this form a vector. Or you are given a circuit that do the job for you.






share|improve this answer














Formula 5.2 refers to an encoding we call amplitude encoding. Imagine you have a vector $x$ with components $x_i$, the components are then encoded as amplitudes of a quantum state.



This encoding is very important as a vector that has a dimension $N$, will be encoded in quantum form using about $log(N)$ qubits. This is the main reason why in many quantum algorithms using this encoding we can achieve exponential speedup in the size of the problem.



However, generally in quantum computing, you have to assume that this encoding is done using a device called quantum random access memory for loading in this form a vector. Or you are given a circuit that do the job for you.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered yesterday









cnada

1,626211




1,626211












  • Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
    – cnada
    yesterday


















  • Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
    – user3176354
    yesterday










  • @user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
    – cnada
    yesterday
















Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
– user3176354
yesterday




Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if your answer contradicts with Norbert's(the other answer). Or maybe both of you are saying the same thing but I cannot see through it..........
– user3176354
yesterday












@user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
– cnada
yesterday




@user3176354 It does not. When I say "a circuit that does the job for you", a circuit is also an algorithm whose output is the state x. Formula 5.2 is typical of an amplitude encoding done by QRAM, which will create this preparation by applying a circuit for this purpose. The purpose of the QRAM will be to prepare classical data to quantum form (however we do not have an efficient implementation of such device so far).
– cnada
yesterday










user3176354 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










 

draft saved


draft discarded


















user3176354 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













user3176354 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












user3176354 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.















 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquantumcomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f4769%2fhow-to-describe-or-encode-the-input-vector-x-of-quantum-fourier-transform%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Bundesstraße 106

Verónica Boquete

Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten