Quantum Simulation of Klein Gordon Equation and Observation of Klein Paradox in IBM Quantum Computer

Quantum Simulation of Klein Gordon Equation and Observation of Klein Paradox in IBM Quantum Computer

Manik Kapil E-mail: manikkapil0@gmail.com    Bikash K. Behera E-mail: bkb13ms061@iiserkol.ac.in    Prasanta K. Panigrahi  Corresponding author.E-mail: pprasanta@iiserkol.ac.in
Abstract

The Klein Gordon equation was the first attempt at unifying special relativity and quantum mechanics. While initially discarded this equation of “many fathers” can be used in understanding spinless particles that consequently led to the discovery of pions and other subatomic particles. The equation leads to the development of Dirac equation and hence quantum field theory. It shows interesting quantum relativistic phenomena like Klein Paradox and “Zitterbewegung”, a rapid vibrating movement of quantum relativistic particles. The simulation of such quantum equations initially motivated Feynman to propose the idea of quantum computation. While many such simulations have been done till date in various physical setups, this is the first time a digital quantum simulation of Klein Gordon equation is proposed on IBM’s quantum computer. Here we simulate the time-dependent Klein Gordon equation in a barrier potential and clearly observe the tunnelling of the particle and anti-particle through a strong potential claiming Klein Paradox. The simulation technique used here inspires the quantum computing community for further studying Klein Gordon equation and applying it to more complicated quantum mechanical systems.

{affiliations}

Department of Physics, Atma Ram Sanatan Dharma College, Delhi University, Dhaula Kaun, 110021, New Delhi, India

Department of Physical Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata, Mohanpur, 741246, West Bengal, India

Keywords: Klein Gordon Equation, Quantum Simulation, IBM Quantum Experience

1 Introduction

The possibilities that quantum computation offers today in not only solving problems of quantum mechanics but also in various other algorithms is truly remarkable [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. It is well known that Shor’s algorithm [7] once simulated on a quantum computer can be used to break our most common form of cryptography to secure data [8]. Similarly many other algorithms like the Grover’s algorithm [9] have also been shown to be exponentially faster than their classical counterparts.

Since 1982 when Richard Feynman proposed the simulation of quantum systems using quantum computers [10] there have been a major development on simulation of quantum mechanical systems. Quantum simulation has been found a great interest in various quantum systems including Hubbard model [11, 12], spin models [13, 14], quantum phase transitions [15, 16], quantum chemistry [17], quantum chaos [18], interferometry [19, 20, 21, 22] and so on. Simulation of such quantum systems has shown to be more effective than those performed by classical systems [23].

The simulation of quantum field theories has been performed by both analog quantum simulations, where the Hamiltonian is mapped to another system [24, 25], or a digital quantum simulation where the Hamiltonian is split using the Suzuki Trotter formula [26, 27, 28], generally split into kinetic and potential energy terms [29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44] and then simulated by appropriately decomposing the Hamiltonian into unitary operators and designing the quantum circuits on a quantum computer. Using the above technique, non-relativistic simulation of the Schrodinger equation [45, 46], relativistic simulations of Dirac equation [24, 25] and the digital simulation of Dirac equation [47] have already been performed.

The Klein Gordon equation which can be derived from Schrodinger’s equation was initially proposed for the unification of quantum mechanics and special relativity. This equation also shows ”Zitterbewegung” and the Klein Paradox, where if the barrier potential V is greater than the particle can easily penerate the barrier as if it wasn’t there [48, 49, 50]. Significant work has been done on the Klein Gordon equation including solving the equation [51, 52] and simulating it in classical systems [53]. This is the first time where we are simulating the Klein Gordon equation in a quantum system. It aims towards simulating the Klein Gordon equation for a single particle using digital quantum simulation. The basic technique used here can be utilized to effectively simulate the Klein Gordon equation that applies for any physical quantum system. Hence it illustrates an important application of quantum computers in the field of quantum simulation. This paper proposes a method for the simulation of the Klein Gordon equation and observes the so called Klein Paradox. We use the IBM quantum computer to simulate these equations using the QISkit, where a number of research works have been performed [54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82]. We mainly use the local simulator device for performing the experiment and taking the results for the simulation purposes.

2 Results

2.1 Theoretical Protocol

A common technique for solving the Klein Gordon equation classically is to represent the wavefunction as two different parts of a vector and then finding a Hamiltonian for that. This helps us to easily understand some of the peculiar natures of the Klein Gordon equation. We mainly use the form, , to solve the equation for the Hamiltonian whose expression is given below.

(1)

where m, , V, c and I represent the mass of the particle, the momentum operator, the scalar potential, the speed of light and the identity matrix respectively where (i = 1, 2, 3) are the Pauli matrices. The wavefunction is a vector with two components.

After solving two simultaneous equations, we have

(2)
(3)

where , and .

The time evolution of a general Hamiltonian is given by

(4)

where and i=1,2. Using the second order Suzuki Trotter decomposition [26, 27, 28] we can decompose the unitary operators as follows.

(5)
(6)

In Eqs. (5) & (6), the kinetic energy portion can be solved by splitting the two momentum operators as given below. Here the box ‘’ denotes the component of the wavefunction used in the particular equation.

(7)

These individual momentum operators can be expressed in momentum space by using quantum Fourier transformation [83, 84] and momentum eigenstates as shown in Eq. (8).

(8)

where , F and represent the momentum eigenvalues, Fourier transformation and it’s inverse respectively. These operators can be implemented on a quantum computer by using a set of controlled phase gates and Hadamard gates [85, 22]. The potential energy term for a double potential can be written as,

(9)

To express the equation as a digital quantum circuit we take the mass of the system as m=0.5 and use the co-ordinates system such that . Using the above values, we have the full expressions for the unitary operators as referred by Eqs. (10) & (11).

(10)
(11)

where and . Here we take the high potential of the barrier as =11 so that the potentials and are 12 and 10 respectively.

2.2 Experimental Results

Figure 1: Quantum circuit for simulating the Klein Gordon equation. Steps (b) and (d) represent the circuits performing the inverse of the Fourier transform . Steps (d) and (g) represent the circuit for the Fourier transform F. Steps (a) and (h) represent the potential term of the Klein Gordon equation. Steps (c1), (c2), (f1), and (f2) are the digital quantum circuit representation for the eigenvalues of the respective eigenfunctions.
Figure 2: Experimental results for the two parts of the wavefunction . Here in the vertical axis 1, 2, 3 and 4 represent , , and respectively. The horizontal axis represents the time scale of the evolution of the quantum state. As time goes on we can see that the particle slowly crosses over the barrier potential as expected from the condition, (Klein Paradox). Case (A): The particle was initially in the state at time t=1. After 10 iterations at time t=10, it was found in state . Case (B): The anti-particle was located in state in the negative time scale. After 8 iterations at time t=4, the anti-particle was found to be located in state . In the above cases, we clearly observe the tunneling of both the particle and anti-particle through lower and higher potentials respectively.

To solve the equation, we use two qubits for representing four lattice points and a small barrier potential for illustrating the tunneling process in the system. The quantum circuits provided in Fig. (2), Case (A) and (B) are used to solve the Eqs. 10 & 11 respectively for the four lattice points. We then run the quantum circuits for different values of t and observe the dynamics of the system by performing a digital simulation. In the circuit, a number of iterations of the circuits were done and a higher amount of iterations of the circuit led to increased accuracy in the results. The number of iterations were kept between 9-10 in most of the cases though even 6 provided appropriate results. Here, t is the only variable in our program which decides the output at various time instances and this output was observed to find the location of the particle at various instances.

In Fig. 2, Case (A) and Case (B) represent the evolution of a quantum system for a particle and an anti-particle respectively as a consequence of Klein Gordon equation. The tunneling is obersved for both the cases as a consequence of Klein Paradox due to a strong potential, i.e., , where and . In Case (A), it can be clearly observed that the particle was initially located in state at time, t=1 in a relatively lower potential region as compared to Case (B). At time t=6, it was in an equal superposition of states and . Then after the application of a number iterations, it slowly tunneled through the barrier of the potential which was at location state. After 10 iterations, i.e., at time t=10, the particle was found to completely cross the barrier and finally located in state. In Case (B), the anti-particle was observed in the negative time scale and in a comparatively higher potential region that clearly indicates its nature that is impossible for a particle. At time, t=-4, it was in the state , then it was found in an equal superposition of and states at time t=0. After 8 iterations, i.e., at time t=4, it was noticed to completely tunnel through the potential situated at state, and finally found to be in state.

Discussion

Here we have proposed a two-qubit quantum circuit for the simulation of Klein Gordon equation to study the nature of particle and anti-particle behaviour. Quantum tunneling of both the particle and anti-particle has been observed due to a strong potential as a consequence of Klein Paradox. The simulation technique used here can be extended to higher dimensional lattice structure and using n= number of qubits for N-qubit lattice, the dynamics of the system for any physical system of the equation can be studied. The proposed digital simulation is very much useful for study of a number of quantum field-theoretic equations.

Methods

The Kinetic energy operator plays a key role in our problem and solving it is of paramount importance. We start by taking the Fourier transform of the kinetic energy operator according to the following equation.

(12)

The form of Fourier transform for the two qubits can be written as follows.

To find the momentum eigenvalue matrix given by , we need to first find the eigenstates of the matrix in the coordinate representation. A wavefunction in the terms of momentum eigenvalues can be expressed as

The eigenvalues of this state can be found using a formula

On calculating this we find that the matrix is diagonal and is given by the following expression.

Solving for two qubit simulation we have

If we take m=0.5 we get the following equation as our kinetic energy operator

(13)

where

References

References

  • [1] Farhi, E. et al. A Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithm Applied to Random Instances of an NP-Complete Problem. Science 292, 472–475 (2001).
  • [2] Han, K.-H. & Kim, J.-H. Genetic quantum algorithm and its application to combinatorial optimization problem. Proc. CEC 2, 1354-1360 (2000).
  • [3] Chuang, I. L., Vandersypen, L. M. K., Zhou, X., Leung, D. W. & Lloyd, S. Experimental realization of a quantum algorithm. Nature 393, 143-146 (1998).
  • [4] Jones, J. A., Mosca, M. & Hansen, R. H. Implementation of a quantum search algorithm on a quantum computer. Nature 393, 344-346 (1998).
  • [5] Gulde, S. et al. Implementation of the Deutsch–Jozsa algorithm on an ion-trap quantum computer. Nature 421, 48-50 (2003).
  • [6] Harrow, A. W., Hassidim, A. & Lloyd, S. Quantum Algorithm for Linear Systems of Equations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 150502 (2009).
  • [7] Shor, P. W. Polynomial-Time Algorithms for Prime Factorization and Discrete Logarithms on a Quantum Computer. SIAM J. Comput. 26(5), 1484–1509 (1997).
  • [8] Lomonaco, S. J. Shor’s Quantum Factoring Algorithm. arXiv preprint arXiv:quant-ph/0010034 (1997).
  • [9] Grover, L. K. Quantum Mechanics Helps in Searching for a Needle in a Haystack. Phy. Rev. Lett. 79, 325 (1997).
  • [10] Feynman, R. P. Simulating Physics with Computers. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 6–7 (1982).
  • [11] Jaksch, D., Bruder, C., Cirac, J. I., Gardiner, C. W. & Zoller, P. Cold Bosonic Atoms in Optical Lattices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3108 (1998).
  • [12] Deng, X.-L., Porras, D. & Cirac, J. I. Quantum phases of interacting phonons in ion traps. Phys. Rev. A 77, 033403 (2008).
  • [13] Garcia-Ripoll, J. J., Martin-Delgado, M. A. & Cirac, J. I. Implementation of Spin Hamiltonians in Optical Lattices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 250405 (2004).
  • [14] Lanyon, B. P. et al. Universal Digital Quantum Simulation with Trapped Ions. Science 332, 57-61 (2011).
  • [15] Greiner, M., Esslinger, T., Mandel, O., Hansch, T. W. & Bloch, I. Quantum phase transition from a superfluid to a Mott insulator in a gas of ultracold atoms. Nature 415, 39-44 (2002).
  • [16] Pollet, L., Picon, J. D., Buchler, H. P. & Troyer, M. Supersolid Phase with Cold Polar Molecules on a Triangular Lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 125302 (2010).
  • [17] Lidar, D. A. & Wang, H. Calculating the thermal rate constant with exponential speedup on a quantum computer. Phys. Rev. E 59, 2429 (1999).
  • [18] Weinstein, Y. S., Lloyd, S., Emerson, J. & Cory, D. G. Experimental implementation of the quantum baker’s map.. Phys. Rev. Lett. 15, 157902 (2002).
  • [19] Leibfried, D. et al. Trapped-ion quantum simulator : experimental application to nonlinear interferometers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 247901 (2002).
  • [20] Viyuela, O. et al. Observation of topological Uhlmann phases with superconducting qubits. npj Quantum Information 4, 10 (2018).
  • [21] Langford, N. K. et al. Experimentally simulating the dynamics of quantum light and matter at deep-strong coupling. npj Quantum Information 8, 1715 (2017).
  • [22] Aggarwal, D., Raj, S., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Application of quantum scrambling in Rydberg atom on IBM quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.00781 (2018).
  • [23] Buluta, I. & Nori, F. Quantum Simulators. Science 326, 5949 (2009).
  • [24] Gerritsma, R. et al. Quantum simulation of the Dirac equation. Nature 463, 68–71 (2010).
  • [25] Lamata, L., Leon, J., Schatz, T. & Solano, E. Dirac Equation and Quantum Relativistic Effects in a Single Trapped Ion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 253005 (2007).
  • [26] Yoshida, H. Construction of higher-order symplectic integrators.. Phys. Lett. A 150, 262-268 (1990).
  • [27] Sornborger, A. T. & Stewart, E. D. Entanglement generation by communication using phase-squeezed light with photon loss. Phys. Rev. A 60, 1956-1965 (1999).
  • [28] Hatano, N. & Suzuki, M. Quantum Annealing and Other Optimization Methods. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).
  • [29] Büchler, H. P. et al. Atomic quantum simulator for lattice gauge theories and ring exchange models. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 040402 (2005).
  • [30] Zohar, E. & Reznik, B. Confinement and lattice quantum-electrodynamic electric flux tubes simulated with ultracold atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 275301 (2011).
  • [31] Szirmai, G. et al. Gauge fields emerging from time reversal symmetry breaking for spin-5/2 fermions in a honeycomb lattice. Phys. Rev. A 84, 011611(R) (2011).
  • [32] Cirac, J. I., Maraner, P. and Pachos, J. K. Cold Atom Simulation of Interacting Relativistic Quantum Field Theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 190403 (2010).
  • [33] Mazza, L. et al. An optical-lattice-based quantum simulator for relativistic field theories and topological insulators. New J. Phys. 14, 015007 (2012).
  • [34] Kapit, E. & Mueller, E. Optical-lattice Hamiltonians for relativistic quantum electrodynamics. Phys. Rev. A 83, 033625 (2011).
  • [35] Bermudez, A. et al. Wilson fermions and axion electrodynamics in optical lattices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 190404 (2010).
  • [36] Bermudez, P. & Pachos, J. K. Yang-Mills gauge theories from simple fermionic lattice models. Phys. Lett. A 373, 2542 (2009).
  • [37] Lepori, L. et al. (3+1) massive Dirac fermions with ultracold atoms in frustrated cubic optical lattices. Europhys. Lett. 92, 50003 (2010).
  • [38] Maeda, K. et al. Simulating dense QCD matter with ultracold atomic boson-fermion mixtures. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 085301 (2009).
  • [39] Rapp, À. et al. Color superfluidity and abaryona formation in ultracold fermions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 160405 (2007).
  • [40] Weimer, H. et al. A Rydberg quantum simulator. Nat. Phys. 6, 382 (2010).
  • [41] Casanova, J. et al. Quantum simulation of quantum field theories in trapped ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 260501 (2011).
  • [42] Doucot, B. et al. Discrete non-Abelian gauge theories in Josephson junction arrays and quantum computation. Phys. Rev. B 69, 214501 (2004).
  • [43] Lewenstein, M. et al. Ultracold atomic gases in optical lattices: Mimicking condensed matter physics and beyond. Adv. Phys. 56, 243-379 (2007).
  • [44] Johanning, M. et al. Quantum simulations with cold trapped ions. J. Phys. B 42, 154009 (2009).
  • [45] Boghosian, B. M. & Taylor, W. Simulating quantum mechanics on a quantum computer. Physica D 120, 30-42 (1998).
  • [46] Benenti, G. & Strini, G. Quantum simulation of the single-particle Schrodinger equation. Am. J. Phys. 76, 657-663 (2007).
  • [47] Fillion-Gourdeau, F., MacLean, S. & Laflamme, R. Algorithm for the solution of the Dirac equation on digital quantum computers. Phys. Rev. A 95, 042343 (2017).
  • [48] Dombey, N., & Calogeracos, A. Seventy years of the Klein paradox. Phys. Rep. 315, 41–58 (1999).
  • [49] Calogeracos, A., & Dombey, N. History and physics of the Klein paradox. Contemp. Phys. 40, 313 (1999).
  • [50] Calogeracos, A., & Dombey, N. Klein Tunnelling and the Klein Paradox. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A14, 631–644 (1999).
  • [51] Ebaid A. Exact solutions for the generalized Klein–Gordon equation via a transformation and Exp-function method and comparison with Adomian’s method. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 223, 278-290 (2009).
  • [52] Feshbach, H. & Villars, F. Elementary Relativistic Wave Mechanics of Spin 0 and Spin 1/2 Particles. Rev. Mod. Phys. 30, 24 (1958).
  • [53] Rusin, T. M. & Zawadzk, W. Zitterbewegung of Klein-Gordon particles and its simulation by classical systems. Phys. Rev. A 86, 1032103 (2012).
  • [54] García-Martín, D., & Sierra, G. Five Experimental Tests on the 5-Qubit IBM Quantum Computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.05642 (2017).
  • [55] Das, S. & Paul, G. Experimental test of Hardy’s paradox on a five-qubit quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.04925 (2017).
  • [56] Behera, B. K., Banerjee, A. & Panigrahi, P. K. Experimental realization of quantum cheque using a five-qubit quantum computer. Quantum Inf. Process. 16, 312 (2016).
  • [57] Hegade, N. N., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Experimental Demonstration of Quantum Tunneling in IBM Quantum Computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.07326 (2017).
  • [58] Majumder, A., Mohapatra, S. & Kumar, A. Experimental Realization of Secure Multiparty Quantum Summation Using Five-Qubit IBM Quantum Computer on Cloud. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.07460 (2017).
  • [59] Sisodia, M., Shukla, A., Thapliyal, K. & Pathak, A. Design and experimental realization of an optimal scheme for teleportion of an n-qubit quantum state. Quantum Inf. Process. 16, 292 (2017).
  • [60] Dash, A., Rout, S., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. A Verification Algorithm and Its Application to Quantum Locker in IBM Quantum Computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.05196 (2017).
  • [61] Wootton, J. R. Demonstrating non-Abelian braiding of surface code defects in a five qubit experiment. Quantum Sci. Technol. 2, 015006 (2017).
  • [62] Berta, M., Wehner, S. & Wilde, M. M. Entropic uncertainty and measurement reversibility. New J. Phys. 18, 073004 (2016).
  • [63] Deffner, S. Demonstration of entanglement assisted invariance on IBM’s quantum experience. Heliyon 3, e00444 (2016).
  • [64] Huffman, E. & Mizel, A. Violation of noninvasive macrorealism by a superconducting qubit: Implementation of a Leggett-Garg test that addresses the clumsiness loophole. Phys. Rev. A 95, 032131 (2017).
  • [65] Alsina, D. & Latorre, J. I. Experimental test of Mermin inequalities on a five-qubit quantum computer. Phys. Rev. A 94, 012314 (2016).
  • [66] Yalçinkaya, İ. & Gedik, Z. Optimization and experimental realization of quantum permutation algorithm. Phys. Rev. A 96, 062339 (2017).
  • [67] Ghosh, D., Agarwal, P., Pandey, P., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Automated Error Correction in IBM Quantum Computer and Explicit Generalization. Quantum Inf. Process. 17, 153 (2018).
  • [68] Kandala, A. et al. Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets. Nature 549, 242-246 (2017).
  • [69] Alvarez-Rodriguez, U., Sanz, M., Lamata, L. & Solano, E. Quantum Artificial Life in an IBM Quantum Computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.09442 (2017).
  • [70] Schuld, M., Fingerhuth, M. & Petruccione, F. Implementing a distance-based classifier with a quantum interference circuit. Europhys. Lett. 119, 60002 (2017).
  • [71] Sisodia, M. et al. Experimental realization of nondestructive discrimination of Bell states using a five-qubit quantum computer. Phys. Lett. A 381, 3860–3874 (2017).
  • [72] Tannu, S. S. & Qureshi, M. K. A Case for Variability-Aware Policies for NISQ-Era Quantum Computers. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10224 (2018).
  • [73] Wootton, J. R. Benchmarking of quantum processors with random circuits. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.02736 (2018).
  • [74] Harper, R. & Flammia, S. Fault tolerance in the IBM Q Experience. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.02359 (2018).
  • [75] Aggarwal, D., Raj, S., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Application of quantum scrambling in Rydberg atom on IBM quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.00781 (2018).
  • [76] Srinivasan, K., Satyajit, S., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Efficient quantum algorithm for solving travelling salesman problem: An IBM quantum experience. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10928 (2017).
  • [77] Dash, A., Sarmah, D., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Exact search algorithm to factorize large biprimes and a triprime on IBM quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10478 (2018).
  • [78] Roffe, J., Headley, D.,Chancellor, N.,Horsman, D. & Kendon, V. Protecting quantum memories using coherent parity check codes. Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 3 (2018).
  • [79] Plesa, M.-I., & Mihai, T. A New Quantum Encryption Scheme. Adv. J. Grad. Res. 3, 1 (2018).
  • [80] Manabputra, Behera, B. K., & Panigrahi, P. K. A Simulational Model for Witnessing Quantum Effects of Gravity Using IBM Quantum Computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.10229 (2018).
  • [81] Jha, R., Das, D., Dash, A., Jayaraman, S., Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. A Novel Quantum N-Queens Solver Algorithm and its Simulation and Application to Satellite Communication Using IBM Quantum Experience. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.10221 (2018).
  • [82] Gangopadhyay, S., Manabputra, Behera, B. K. & Panigrahi, P. K. Generalization and Demonstration of an Entanglement Based Deutsch-Jozsa Like Algorithm Using a 5-Qubit Quantum Computer. Quantum Inf. Process. 17, 160 (2018).
  • [83] Sornborger, A. T. Quantum Simulation of Tunneling in Small Systems. Sci. Rep. 2, 597 (2012).
  • [84] Feng, G.-R., Lu, Y., Hao, L., Zhang, F.-H. & Long, G.-L. Experimental simulation of quantum tunneling in small systems. Sci. Rep. 3, 2232 (2013).
  • [85] Coppersmith, D. An approximate Fourier transform useful in quantum factoring. IBM Res. Rep. (1994).

Acknowledgements

M.K. acknowledges the hospitality provided by Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata. M.K. acknowledges Daattavya Aggarwal for helping with QISKit. B.K.B. acknowledges the financial support of DST Inspire Fellowship. We are extremely grateful to IBM team and IBM Quantum Experience project. The discussions and opinions developed in this paper are only those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions of IBM or IBM QE team.

Author contributions

M.K. has investigated the theoretical analysis, designed the quantum circuit, performed the experiment and taken the data using QISKit. M.K. and B.K.B. have the contribution to the composition of the manuscript. B.K.B. has supervised the project. M.K. and B.K.B. have completed the project under the guidance of P.K.P.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial as well as non-financial interests.

Comments 0
Request Comment
You are adding the first comment!
How to quickly get a good reply:
  • Give credit where it’s due by listing out the positive aspects of a paper before getting into which changes should be made.
  • Be specific in your critique, and provide supporting evidence with appropriate references to substantiate general statements.
  • Your comment should inspire ideas to flow and help the author improves the paper.

The better we are at sharing our knowledge with each other, the faster we move forward.
""
The feedback must be of minimum 40 characters and the title a minimum of 5 characters
   
Add comment
Cancel
Loading ...
278271
This is a comment super asjknd jkasnjk adsnkj
Upvote
Downvote
""
The feedback must be of minumum 40 characters
The feedback must be of minumum 40 characters
Submit
Cancel

You are asking your first question!
How to quickly get a good answer:
  • Keep your question short and to the point
  • Check for grammar or spelling errors.
  • Phrase it like a question
Test
Test description