4.5 Article

Equivalence Checking of Sequential Quantum Circuits

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TCAD.2021.3117506

Keywords

Equivalence checking; mealy machines; quantum circuits; quantum computing; sequential circuits

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFA0306701]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61832015]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We propose a formal framework for equivalence checking of sequential quantum circuits and develop an algorithm to address the major difficulty in quantum circuits. Based on experimental results, our algorithm has a complexity comparable to that of algorithms for checking classical sequential circuits.
We define a formal framework for equivalence checking of sequential quantum circuits. The model we adopt is a quantum state machine, which is a natural quantum generalization of Mealy machines. A major difficulty in checking quantum circuits (but not present in checking classical circuits) is that the state spaces of quantum circuits are continuums. This difficulty is resolved by our main theorem showing that equivalence checking of two quantum Mealy machines can be done with input sequences that are taken from some chosen basis (which are finite) and have a length quadratic in the dimensions of the state Hilbert spaces of the machines. Based on this theoretical result, we develop an (and to the best of our knowledge, the first) algorithm for checking equivalence of sequential quantum circuits with running time O(23(m+5l)(2(3m)( )+ 2(3l))), where m and l denote the numbers of input and internal qubits, respectively. The complexity of our algorithm is comparable with that of the known algorithms for checking classical sequential circuits in the sense that both are exponential in the number of (qu)bits. Several case studies and experiments are presented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available