4.6 Article

Computation in a general physical setting

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1751-8121/ac2007

关键词

quantum computation; generalised probabilistic theories; quantum foundations

资金

  1. EPSRC through the National Quantum Technology Hub in Networked Quantum Information Technologies
  2. UCL doctoral prize fellowship [534936]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper explores the computational abilities of theories within the generalised probabilistic theory framework and compares them with quantum theory. It provides new bounds on computational ability and suggests that a quantum computer can simulate computation within certain sub-classes of generalised probabilistic theories with polynomial overhead. The paper also discusses the relation between this simulation conjecture and delegated computation, similar to the relation between quantum non-locality and device-independent cryptography.
The computational abilities of theories within the generalised probabilistic theory framework has been the subject of much recent study. Such investigations aim to gain an understanding of the possible connections between physical principles and computation. Moreover, comparing and contrasting the computational properties of quantum theory with other operationally-sensible theories could shed light on the strengths and limitations of quantum computation. This paper reviews and extends some of these results, deriving new bounds on the computational ability of theories satisfying n-local tomography, and theories in which states are represented as generalised superpositions. It moreover provides a refined version of the conjecture that a quantum computer can simulate the computation in any theory within a certain sub-class of generalised probabilistic theories with at most polynomial overhead. The paper ends by describing an important relation between this conjecture and delegated computation, similar to the relation between quantum non-locality and device-independent cryptography.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据