Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computer Science Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cosrev

Survey
A Survey on quantum computing technology✩ , ✩✩
∗
Laszlo Gyongyosi a,b,c , , Sandor Imre b
a
School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
b
Department of Networked Systems and Services, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 1117 Budapest, Hungary
c
MTA-BME Information Systems Research Group, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1051 Budapest, Hungary

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: The power of quantum computing technologies is based on the fundamentals of quantum mechanics, such
Received 6 June 2018 as quantum superposition, quantum entanglement, or the no-cloning theorem. Since these phenomena
Received in revised form 8 September 2018 have no classical analogue, similar results cannot be achieved within the framework of traditional com-
Accepted 16 November 2018
puting. The experimental insights of quantum computing technologies have already been demonstrated,
Available online xxxx
and several studies are in progress. Here we review the most recent results of quantum computation
Keywords: technology and address the open problems of the field.
Quantum computations © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Quantum information processing
Quantum computer
Quantum entanglement

Contents

1. Introduction......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 52
2. Quantum computations...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 52
2.1. Related work........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 53
3. Building blocks of quantum computers ............................................................................................................................................................................ 53
3.1. Quantum gates ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 53
3.2. Quantum memories ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 54
3.3. Quantum CPUs........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 54
3.4. Controlling and measurement............................................................................................................................................................................... 55
3.5. Quantum error correction...................................................................................................................................................................................... 57
3.6. Related work........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 57
4. Large-Scale quantum computing ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 58
4.1. Gate model quantum computers .......................................................................................................................................................................... 58
4.2. Distributed topologies ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 59
4.3. Physical implementations ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 59
4.4. Related works ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 60
5. Quantum algorithm implementations .............................................................................................................................................................................. 62
5.1. Large-Scale quantum computations ..................................................................................................................................................................... 62
5.2. Computational problems ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 62
5.3. Quantum machine learning ................................................................................................................................................................................... 64
5.4. Optimization problems .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 64
5.5. Related work........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 65
6. Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66
References ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66

✩ This work was partially supported by the National Research Development

and Innovation Office of Hungary (Project No. 2017-1.2.1-NKP-2017-00001), by
the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund - OTKA K-112125 and in part by the BME
Artificial Intelligence FIKP grant of EMMI (BME FIKP-MI/SC).
✩✩ No author associated with this paper has disclosed any potential or pertinent ∗ Corresponding author at: School of Electronics and Computer Science, Univer-
conflicts which may be perceived to have impending conflict with this work. For sity of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
full disclosure statements refer to https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2018.11.002. E-mail address: l.gyongyosi@soton.ac.uk (L. Gyongyosi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2018.11.002
1574-0137/© 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
52 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

1. Introduction 2. Quantum computations

Quantum computing technology offers fundamentally different Quantum computers are based on the fundamental concept of
solutions to computational problems and enables more efficient quantum information. In these computers, information is repre-
problem-solving than what is possible with classical computations. sented by quantum states, and with the exploitation of quantum
effects provided by quantum mechanics (such as quantum super-
The experimental results are promising, and quantum computers
position, quantum entanglement, quantum interference, the no-
may be available commercially within a few years [1–10]. One of
cloning theorem, decoherence [14–18] etc.), quantum computa-
the most famous algorithms that demonstrate the power of quan-
tions can be performed in a quantum computer. In the physical
tum computers is Shor’s prime factorization algorithm [11]. The
layer, quantum systems can manifest in several different ways
difference between the power of classical and quantum computing (atom energy levels, spin, polarization). A general quantum system
is demonstrable via the breaking speed of the Rivest–Shamir– refers to a d-dimensional quantum system (for a qubit system, d =
Adleman (RSA) algorithm [12]. Solving this computational problem 2), and therefore, a quantum register (a set of n quantum states) in
requires billions of years in a traditional computational setting, a superposition allows us to represent dn possible classical values
while in theory, a quantum computer can solve it within a few simultaneously. In quantum circuit computations, the quantum
hours [11,13]. In 1994, this algorithm caused the ‘‘big bang’’ of states are naturally modeled as entangled systems; thus, the state
quantum computations and paved the way for the development of each quantum system depends on the other.
of quantum computing technology and the evaluation of quantum Quantum computations are based on the fundamental concept
computers [14]. Quantum computers integrate several different of reversible computation. In theory, in a reversible computa-
elements—from a functional point of view, such elements are simi- tion, the complete initial state can be recovered from the output
lar to traditional functional ones (registers, gates, memories, buses, state [19]. Reversible circuits can also be designed for classical
CPUs, storage devices), but in the physical layer, the structures of systems [20] such that the number of inputs and outputs of a
classical and quantum devices are fundamentally different. In a reversible gate must be equal, and the mapping of a particular
quantum computational framework, the quantum operations are input onto a given output must be one-to-one. These rules must
applied on quantum registers. In the quantum register, quantum also be satisfied for a quantum computation system; thus, the
states formulate quantum superposition, while in a quantum cir- input quantum states of a quantum circuit evolve reversibly via
cuit, the quantum states are entangled. These phenomena lead unitary operations. Practically, such reversibility is achieved by a
to a fundamentally different system characteristic than what is series of quantum gates (for example, applying a second NOT gate
present in a traditional computer. Besides these, quantum hard- – a quantum gate that negates the input – on the output of the
first NOT gate recovers the original input, etc.). The temporary
ware restrictions such as the no-cloning theorem also require
quantum systems in a quantum computation setting are called
different circuit design technologies since a quantum state cannot
ancilla states, which are neglected as the output is realized. Finally,
be simultaneously present in more than one quantum gate [5,10].
a measurement is applied on the quantum register to extract a
A quantum computer has reversible quantum gates that per-
classical numerical value for further calculations.
form a unitary operation on the quantum systems. Quantum com-
Quantum algorithms utilize the fundamentals of quantum com-
puters are working today, but currently we have only a few quan- putational complexity. Several quantum algorithms have been
tum computer devices in a laboratory environment [1,3–8]. How- proposed so far, whose general conclusion is that utilizing the
ever, several new fields and interesting results have recently effects of quantum mechanics would result in a significant speedup
emerged that can significantly boost these developments. The (exponential, polynomial, superpolynomial) over the classical al-
large-scale quantum computers are realized in a distributed set- gorithms. Besides this (as demonstrated in the prime factorization
ting, where smaller quantum computers communicate with one problem), it is implied that several problems currently intractable
another via a quantum bus. These physically large quantum com- via classical algorithms can be solved via quantum algorithms.
puters can also be shrunken into small-sized devices via new For the basic requirements on the physical implementations
technologies in the next few years. The situation is very similar of quantum computers, the DiVincenzo criteria [21] establish the
to the evolution phases of classical computers both in size and fundamental guidelines. These criteria imply the requirement of
performance. extensible quantum registers, the initialization of the quantum
The most recent research papers and results of quantum com- registers to a known state, the requirement of a universal gate set
putation technology are reviewed here. All sections also address to run arbitrary quantum algorithms on the quantum computer,
the open problems of the field. State-of-the art references are and requirements on the coherence time and fidelity to perform
summarized in the Related Work subsection at the end of each long processes, and the results of the quantum computations have
section. to be extractable from the quantum computer via measurements.
The novel contributions of our manuscript are as follows: These are the fundaments of the practical implementation of any
quantum computation.
• We review the most recent results of quantum computation The conceptual diagram of the evolution of quantum computing
technology and address its ongoing issues. technology is depicted in Fig. 1. In the functional layer, the aims of
• We summarize the most recent and relevant papers on quantum classical and quantum computation technology are similar, but in
computing technology. the physical layer, these fields are completely different. The physi-
• We present the results in a well-structured, easily understand- cal foundations of quantum computing technologies are laid down
able, and easily acceptable form. by the DiVincenzo criteria, which are supplemented with particu-
lar physical layer attributes. From quantum computing technology,
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we review the quantum computers are derived with particular conditions on the
fundamentals of quantum computations. In Section 3, we discuss physical layer attributes of quantum registers, gates, circuits, and
the basic quantum hardware elements. In Section 4, we review memories
the results of large-scale quantum computations. In Section 5, The problem of quantum computational complexity has been
quantum algorithm implementations are summarized. Finally, in analyzed from several different aspects. In [22], the authors studied
Section 6, we conclude the paper. the computational complexity of linear optics and provided new
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 53

Fig. 1. The conceptual diagram of the evolution of quantum computing technology from classical computing technology. Quantum computers employ the results integrated
by quantum computing technologies.

evidence that quantum computers cannot be efficiently simulated pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for
by classical computers. The authors also defined a model of com- quantum spin systems, see [36]. For an examination of the problem
putation in which identical photons are generated, sent through of temporally unstructured quantum computation, see [37]. The
a linear-optical network, and then nonadaptively measured to topic of universal blind quantum computation is discussed in [38].
count the number of photons in each mode. They also studied The problem of multiparty delegated quantum computing is re-
the prospects for realizing the model using current photonics and viewed in [39]. For a survey on the subject of quantum simulation,
optics technology. The authors concluded that the proposed model see [40].
can solve sampling problems and search for problems that are
classically intractable. 3. Building blocks of quantum computers
Aaronson in [23] studied the so-called ‘‘learnability’’ of quan-
tum states. As shown in this work, a quantum state can be charac- To discuss the most recent updates regarding the fundamen-
terized by using a number of measurements that grows only lin- tal building blocks of quantum computers, we use the follow-
early with the number of quantum states. The author analyzed the ing classification: quantum gates, quantum memories, quantum
complexity of quantum tomography and showed the possibility of CPUs, quantum controlling and measurement, and quantum error-
a new simulation of quantum one-way communication protocols correction tools.
by the framework. The paper also analyzed the problem of using a
trusted classical advice to verify an untrusted quantum advice. 3.1. Quantum gates

2.1. Related work The quantum gates of a quantum computer perform unitary
operations on quantum states. The Toffoli and Fredkin quantum
For some books on the fundamentals of quantum computa- gates [14,15,17–19] are three-bit gates and are essential since any
tions and information, see [17] and [14,15], while for the main quantum circuit can be decomposed into a set of Toffoli gates or
attributes of quantum communication networks, see [9]. Deutsch’s Fredking gates and can also simulate NOT or CNOT (Controlled-
fundamental article on quantum theory and the universal quan- NOT) gates. In other words, either gate can be used to realize
tum computer can be found in [24]. For Feynman’s article on the universal quantum computations [18]. Since quantum gates are
question of simulating quantum computations with traditional reversible, the ancilla states are cleared, and only the valuable
computers, see [25]. For the details of the so-called no-cloning the- outputs are kept.
orem, see [26]. For quantum computation problems, see [27]. For In the physical layer, the quantum gates can be realized by
a study on the methods and attributes of maintaining coherence ion traps, superconductors, linear optic tools, diamonds, quantum
in quantum computers, see Unruh’s paper from 1995 [28]. For a dots, donor-based systems, or topological quantum computing el-
fundamental work on quantum coding, see [29]. For a discussion ements, see the related references in the Related Work subsection.
of the strengths and weaknesses of quantum computing, see [30]. Handling the errors of the quantum gates for practical implemen-
A fundamental article on quantum complexity theory is found tations requiring efficient quantum error-correction codes is still
in [31]. For DiVincenzo’s seminal paper on quantum computations an open problem [8,10,41–52].
from 2000, see [21]. For Shor’s major study on prime factorization In [53] the authors studied the achievable quantum advantages
by a quantum computer, see [11]. A great review on quantum with shallow circuits. As the authors have found the constant-
algorithms can be found in [32]. For a study on quantum algo- depth quantum circuits are more powerful than their classical
rithms for algebraic problems, see [33]. For a paper on some recent counterparts. As the authors concluded that any classical proba-
progress in quantum algorithms, see [34]. An account of the role of bilistic circuit that solves that particular problem must have depth
entanglement in quantum-computational speed-up can be found logarithmic in the number of input quantum states. The authors
in [35]. For a study on matrix product states, projected entangled also found that this problem can be solved with unit certainty
54 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

by a constant-depth quantum circuit. This quantum circuit has to in quantum memory. The authors showed that at the present of
contain only one- and two-qubit gates acting locally on a two- some prior knowledge and with some conditions on the iteration
dimensional grid, which represents a practically implementable procedure, the analyzed models are useful for error correction in
gate model structure. quantum memories.
In [54], the authors studied the power of IQP (instantaneous In [66] a definition of quantum memristors (resistors with
quantum polynomial-time) circuits in the presence of some physi- memory whose resistance depends on the history of the crossing
cally motivated constraints. The results are particularly important, charges) is included. The decoherence mechanism in the pro-
since it is hard to simulate classically an IOP circuit. In this work posed model is controlled by a continuous-measurement feedback
the authors found that there exists a family of IQP circuits that can scheme. The authors also demonstrated that memory effects ac-
be implemented on a square lattice of n qubits with a particular tually persist in the quantum regime, and the superconducting
depth. They also found that if an arbitrarily small constant amount circuits are ideal for their practical implementation. As the authors
of noise is added to each qubit there exists a polynomial-time concluded, the introduced model of quantum memristor can be
classical algorithm that can simulate sampling from the resulting used as a building block for neuromorphic quantum computa-
distribution. tions, and quantum simulations of non-Markovian systems. The
In [55], the authors studied the design methods of high-fidelity quantum memristors are resistive quantum elements retaining
three-qubit gates (Toffoli, Controlled-Not-Not and Fredkin), These information of their past dynamics [67]. In [67], the authors ana-
quantum gates are particularly important for quantum error cor- lyzed the quantum memristors implementations using supercon-
rection and experimental quantum information processing. The ducting circuits. The authors introduced a quantum device whose
proposed model is based on the fundamentals of machine-learning. memristive behavior arises from quasiparticle-induced tunneling
As the authors have found, the procedures are applicable to a sys- when supercurrents are canceled. As the authors have introduced
tem comprising three nearest-neighbor-coupled superconducting a model for the quantification of quantum memory retention, and
artificial atoms. The authors concluded that the proposed scheme concluded the hysteretic behavior is achievable via currently im-
achieves 99.9% fidelity. This result is particularly convenient since plementable measurement procedures in superconducting quan-
it is a threshold fidelity for fault-tolerant quantum computing. tum circuits. In [68], an analysis of qubit-based memcapacitors and
meminductors is proposed. As the authors found, the capacitive
3.2. Quantum memories and inductive devices offer remarkable functionalities for quantum
computations (superconducting charge and phase qubits are quan-
In quantum circuit computations, quantum memories are for- tum versions of memory capacitive and inductive systems). As it is
mulated by n stationary quantum states. The quantum memories shown in this work, the qubit-based memcapacitors and memin-
store these quantum systems in a quantum register for information ductors exhibit unusual hysteresis curves for some special inputs.
processing. As a main result of this paper, the set of known memcapacitive and
Several different concepts exist in the literature for the realiza- meminductive systems can be extended to qubit-based quantum
tion of quantum memories. An interesting approach is topological devices.
quantum memory [56], which is achieved via an array or torus of
quantum states. These quantum systems are entangled in some 3.3. Quantum CPUs
patterns to formulate a stable logical quantum system.
Regarding the physical implementations of quantum memories, Quantum CPUs use a quantum bus for the communication
improving the memory lifetimes are still an open problem [8,57– between the functional elements of a quantum computer. From a
64], - however the results are encouraging. A room-temperature computing perspective, quantum CPUs can be approached through
quantum bit memory exceeding one second has been demon- the building blocks that formulate it: quantum adders. Several
strated in [60], while in [61], a large-scale quantum-computer different reversible quantum adder types have been defined, see
architecture has been proposed with atomic memory and photonic quantum Fourier-transform-based adders, linear-time adders,
interconnects. quantum carry-save adders, carry-lookahead adders, conditional-
For the discussion on quantum random access memory, see [59]. sum adders, quantum carry-select adders, quantum carry-ripple
As the authors defined, a quantum random access memory (qRAM) adders [19] to realize quantum computations in different archi-
uses n qubits to address any quantum superposition of N memory tectural models. The quantum versions of the classical adders can
cells. The authors proposed an architecture that exponentially also be made for quantum computations, with reversible struc-
reduces the requirements for a memory call. As the authors found, ture and parallel implementations. The quantum adders are all
the results allows to construct a more robust qRAM algorithm and reversible and use ancilla quantum states, but they are equipped
also leads to an exponential decrease in the power needed for with different working mechanisms, circuit depths, latencies, and
addressing. The work concluded with a quantum optical imple- performance; thus, the realization of their cooperation brings up
mentation. several open problems [69–77].
The exponential capacity of associative memories under quan- For the parallelization of the quantum circuits, two basic net-
tum annealing recall is studied in [65]. In this work the authors works models were defined in [19]. The first network model allows
showed that using quantum annealing for recall tasks endows long-distance communication between a set of quantum states
associative memory models (that models can store a sublinear (set of states that are involved in the quantum computations).
number of memories in some theoretical models) with exponential Meanwhile, the second model allows only local communications; it
storage capacities. The authors also demonstrated the application is precisely possible only between the nearest neighbors in a linear
of their scheme via the Dwave processor that provided a pro- layout [9,19]. The performance of the various quantum adders was
grammable quantum annealing device. characterized in these network models, and it has been concluded
The optimization of dynamical decoupling for quantum mem- that the performance of the different configurations is close to each
ory via recurrent neural networks is studied in [57]. In this work other. For the implementation of the quantum communications
the authors utilized the methods of traditional machine learning between the quantum CPU and the functional elements of the
that are based on recurrent neural networks to optimize dynam- quantum computer, the different experimental quantum error-
ical decoupling sequences. As the authors note, these decoupling correction methods can be used [19]. By theory, the performance of
method is a relatively simple technique for suppressing the errors a quantum circuit is denoted by O (·), and because of the nature of
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 55
(√
D
)
signal propagations, the latency of any circuit is limited to O n binary quantum computation, and to improve the designs of the
in an n-bit system, and with D-dimensional structure (practically, expensive units. The authors proposed techniques for the cost
D = 3). reduction, and for the fault-tolerant designs for the circuits.
In [19], five different qubus interconnect topologies were ana- In [79], the competing and cooperating technological trends re-
lyzed using Shor’s prime factorization algorithm. For the basic gate lated to experimental quantum computing and quantum computer
structure of the quantum prime factorization algorithm, see Fig. 2. implementations are studied. As it is concluded here, classical
The quantum algorithm aims to increase the probabilities of the computers will still play a relevant part, however the classical
solutions (red dots) in the quantum register A. computations are limited by thermodynamics and by the nature
As it has been concluded in [19], the quantum carry-ripple of atomic matter and quantum effects.
adder provides the best performance for a wide range of param-
eters. As it is concluded in this work, the small nodes (up to 3.4. Controlling and measurement
five logical qubits) and a linear interconnection network provide
adequate performance; more complex networks are unnecessary The appropriate control mechanisms are a necessity for quan-
as the number of bits of the factorized number reaches several tum state manipulations, readout, error-correction processes, and
hundred bits. Regarding the performance of these quantum adders, fault-tolerant quantum computations.
in this work it also has been concluded that these adders makes Relevant progress has been made since the ion trap-based im-
possible to factorize a 6000-bit number one million times and plementations [10,61,80–90], such as superconducting quantum
thirteen thousand times faster than it is possible by the BCDP circuits [1,4,8,42,67,91–97], linear optics [10,98–118], topological
(Beckman–Chari–Devabhaktuni–Preskill) modular exponentiation quantum computing [43,47,52,119–130], quantum dots [75,77,
algorithm. 131–138], donor-based quantum implementations [10,62,69,138–
In [70] the authors also studied the properties of quantum 146], anyon-based quantum computing [10,96,123,126,130,147,
adders, specifically the method of protected state transfer using 148], and others (see Related Works).
an approximate quantum adder. In this work the authors de- An important open problem in this fields is the preparation
fined a decoherence protected protocol for transmitting photonics of quantum systems for the computations [149–153], as well as
quantum states over depolarizing quantum channels. The studied the experimental realization of the measurements [48,49,101,113,
protocol was implemented by an approximate quantum adder 154–164] that extracts valuable information from the quantum
engineered through spontaneous parametric down converters. As states.
the authors concluded a higher success probability can be achieved In [151] the authors studied the practical superposing of two
via the method than by distilled quantum teleportation protocols pure quantum states with partial prior knowledge. The results
for distances below a threshold. In [72], the authors studied the are particularly important in experimental quantum information
approximate quantum adders with genetic algorithms. Particu- processing since generating superposition of any two unknown
larly, the authors proposed the theoretical aspects of approximate pure states is a challenge since it can be achieved only with some
quantum adders, and defined an optimization method that is based prior knowledge about the input states but only in a probabilistic
on genetic algorithms. As the authors have found the results makes way. The apriori knowledge is represented by the overlap between
possible to improve the achievable efficiency and fidelity of some the two unknown states with respect to some given referential
previous protocols. The authors practically implemented an ap- state. In [151], the authors implemented the probabilistic protocol
proximate quantum adder using the IBM Quantum Experience. As of superposing two pure states in a three-qubit nuclear magnetic
the authors concluded the approximate quantum adders can help resonance system. They also studied the feasibility of the protocol
to enhance quantum information processing. by preparing a families of input states, and determined the average
In [78], a method for quantum state transfer via noisy photonic fidelity between the prepared state. Since the achieved fidelity
and phononic waveguides is studied. The authors defined a proto- was high, the authors have also concluded that the proposed im-
col in which a quantum state of photons stored in a first cavity can plementation can be extended to more complex situations and to
be faithfully transferred to a second distant cavity via an infinite complex quantum circuits.
one-dimensional waveguide. As the authors found this transfer is In [149], the authors also studied the problem of superposing
possible while the transferred information being immune to arbi- unknown quantum states. Particularly, in this work the authors
trary noise (e.g. thermal noise) injected into the waveguide. The defined an experimentally feasible protocol to superpose multiple
authors also studied a cavity QED setup, where atomic ensembles, pure states of a d dimensional quantum system. The authors also
or single atoms represented the quantum memory. As the authors proposed a practical realization on a two-qubit NMR (nuclear
concluded the proposed models and results can be applied in the magnetic resonance) quantum processor.
various fields of phononic quantum information processing. In [165] the authors studied some quantum sampling problems,
In [71], the authors studied the realization of quantum au- particularly focusing on boson sampling and quantum supremacy.
toencoders using quantum adders with genetic algorithms. As The authors gave a summary on the arguments that are in use to
the authors stated, there exists a useful connection between ap- deduce when sampling problems are hard for classical computers
proximate quantum adders and quantum autoencoders. As the to simulate, particularly focusing on boson sampling. The authors
authors found, it is possible to develop optimized approximate gave a conclusion on these classes and reviewed the recent ex-
quantum adders using genetic algorithms. As the authors have perimental realization connected to quantum supremacy in boson
concluded, the results also have several practical consequences, sampling.
since quantum autoencoders can be implemented for a variety In [166], the authors studied the application of differential
of initial states, and quantum autoencoders can be designed via equations in photonic quantum information processing. The au-
controllable quantum platforms. thors introduced a model for the realization of photonic quan-
In [73], the authors studied the problem of space-efficient de- tum circuits whose dynamics is determined by some differential
sign for reversible floating point adder in quantum computing. As equations. As the authors have concluded, the studied model en-
the authors emphasized, reversible logic has crucial significance in ables the implementation of quantum feedback and feedforward
experimental low-power computing and quantum computing. The without requiring any intermediate measurements in the quantum
authors defined a space-efficient reversible floating-point adder circuit. The results concluded, the proposed results represent a
for quantum computers. The proposed model can be used for promising way towards chip-based integrated quantum control.
56 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

Fig. 2. The conceptual model of Shor’s prime factorization algorithm. (a) The quantum circuit of the factorization algorithm. The quantum circuit consists of two quantum
registers: the first quantum register A (depicted by the dashed box) contains t qubits; the second quantum register B (dashed box) contains n qubits. First, the superposition
of the qubits of register A is prepared via the H Hadamard operation. Then, a U unitary operation is applied that is required for the period-finding method. Next, the qubits
of register B are measured via the M1 measurement operator. Afterward, a second unitary operation UIQFT , the inverse quantum Fourier transformation (IQFT ), is applied on
quantum register A. Finally, the qubits of A are measured by the M2 operator. (b) The state of register A after M1 but before UIQFT . (c) The state of register A after UIQFT . Before
UIQFT , the p probabilities of the solutions (depicted by red dots) in A are low, p = r /2t (the nonsolutions are depicted by blue dots, and b is a constant), where r is the period.
After UIQFT , the values of p are increased to p = 1/r . After the second measurement M2 , some postprocessing steps (dashed box) need to determine r from the measurement
result.

In [167], a machine-learning-based model is studied for the probability and the resources (number of copies) used. The authors
prediction and real-time compensation of qubit decoherence. The defined a new state discrimination task, since in their framework
authors applied some techniques from traditional control theory the average resources are minimized for a fixed admissible error
and traditional machine learning to predict the future evolution probability. They concluded that this new task is not performed
of the state of a qubit. As the authors concluded, the studied optimally by previously known strategies, and they also derived
experimental models demonstrate significant improvements in and experimentally test.
qubit phase stability over the standard measurement-based feed- In [152], the authors studied the problem of superposition gen-
back approaches. As the authors have found the proposed models eration of some unknown quantum states. The authors proposed
require no further extensions on the hardware-layer, and also well a theorem that forbids the existence of a universal probabilistic
applicable for qubit systems where the measurement are achieved quantum protocol producing a superposition of two unknown
by projective measurements. quantum states. The paper also introduced a probabilistic protocol
As another application of quantum artificial intelligence in the for the creating of superposition of two unknown states, such
field of superconducting circuits can be found in [95]. The analysis
that the quantum states have a fixed overlap with the known
covers some basic protocols of quantum reinforcement learning
referential pure state. As the authors found, the protocol can be
using superconducting circuit implementations. It is also assumed
implemented on arbitrary Hilbert spaces allowing a wide-range of
in the paper that these superconducting circuits are equipped
practical implementations.
with feedback-loop control. The paper also defines some diverse
In [150], a study on the experimental creation of superposition
scenarios for superconducting circuits.
of unknown photonic quantum states is provided. The authors
In [168], the authors studied the determination and correction
of persistent biases in quantum annealers. The paper addresses defined a method for the creation of superposition of arbitrary two
of some performance issues of quantum annealers. The authors unknown photonic qubits as long as they have nonzero overlaps
defined a strategy to determine and correct persistent, systematic with the horizontal polarization state. As the paper concluded,
biases between the actual values of the programmable parameters the average fidelity as high as 0.99, thus a practical implementa-
and their user-specified values. The authors also tested their model tions could have a significant importance in experimental quantum
in experiment using the D-Wave quantum device implementa- computations. A possible practical application of the protocol is
tions. The work concluded that the proposed model can enhance information compression by coherent superposition.
the performance of the actual quantum device. In [153], the authors added some knowledge to the current
In [169], the authors studied quantum state discrimination results regarding the generation of superposition of two unknown
using the minimum average number of copies. As the authors states. The authors showed that in the presence of closed time
stated, in the task of discriminating between nonorthogonal quan- like curves, it is possible to generate superposition of unknown
tum states from multiple copies, the key parameters are the error quantum states and evade the no-go result of [152].
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 57

3.5. Quantum error correction of fault-tolerant quantum computers. In their model, the authors
have used the so-called ‘‘Coulomb-blockade spectroscopy’’ in a
The development of quantum error-correction methods allows nanowire segment that results in a superconducting Coulomb is-
us to satisfy the requirements on high fidelity and adequate co- land (a ‘‘Majorana island’’). As the authors have found, the intro-
herence times in quantum computations. The nature of errors in duced model helps to clarify the trivial-to-topological transition in
a quantum computation system significantly differs from that of finite systems and to study the advanced properties of topological
classical system errors [45]. Different physical technologies were protection.
introduced for the various quantum hardware implementations The authors in [8] showed that the lifetime of a quantum bit can
to achieve reliable, fault-tolerant quantum computations, but a be extended with error correction in superconducting circuits. The
universal model for quantum error correction is still an open prob- implemented qubits are encoded in superpositions of Schrödinger-
lem [8,10,41–52]. cat states of a superconducting resonator. The practical imple-
The quantum error-correction methods generally use the input mentation covers a quantum error correction protocol that uses
data quantum states and syndrome quantum states that are used a feedback control mechanism. In the proposed implementation,
to identify error information. In experimental quantum computa- the corrected qubit lifetime was 320 microseconds. As the authors
tions, a distinction exists between the logical and physical rep- have concluded, these results illustrate the benefits of a hardware-
resentations of quantum states in that a logical quantum system efficient qubit encoding rather than traditional quantum error
is encoded by several quantum states in the physical layer. The correction schemes.
developed quantum error-correction codes (such as designs of In [172], the question of quantum supremacy (quantum devices
topological error correction, etc.) are adaptable for the different without error correction can perform a well-defined computa-
requirements of the various physical implementations. tional task beyond the capabilities of currently available classical
In [46], the authors studied the problem of surface code error computers) is studied. In this work, the authors analyzed the task of
correction on a defective lattice. The motivation behind these error sampling from the output distributions of (pseudo-)random quan-
correction schemes, as it is also stated by the authors is that the tum circuits. As the authors have found, sampling the distribution
implementations of quantum computers will be susceptible to loss classically requires a high-cost numerical simulation of the circuit.
in the form of physically faulty quantum states. The adaptive error This cost is increases exponentially in function of the number of
correction schemes will therefore have a crucial significance in qubits of the system. The authors analyzed quantum circuits up to
practical quantum computations and in the implementations of 42 qubits. As the authors have found, quantum supremacy can be
quantum computers. The authors in this work simulated statically achieved in the near-term quantum devices with approximately
fifty superconducting qubits.
placed single-fault lattices and lattices. The authors concluded
In [173], the authors studied the characterization of decohering
that a static loss at the periphery of the lattice has less negative
quantum systems using a machine learning approach. They an-
effect than a static loss at the center. The authors also analyzed
alyzed the decoherence effects in adaptive characterization pro-
different metrics for predicting quantum chip performance, and
cesses, where measurement settings are updated via data feed-
they concluded that the depth of the deepest stabilizer circuit
back. As the authors have found, adapting measurements can pro-
in the lattice gave the strongest correlation with post-correction
vide estimates whose error decreases exponentially in the number
residual error rates. The results are particularly convenient for
of measurements. The authors also developed a framework for
experimental quantum computations. In [170], the authors studied
handling high initial parameter uncertainty and for the presence
the problems of state injection, lattice surgery and dense pack-
of imperfections in the readout in decohering quantum systems.
ing of the deformation-based surface code. The authors defined
In [174], the authors defined quantum autoencoders for efficient
a deformation-based surface code using superstabilizers to de-
compression of quantum data. By theory, the task of an autoen-
tect short error chains connecting the superstabilizers. The results
coder is to map the input to a lower dimensional point such that the
concluded that it is possible to place logical qubits close together
input can likely be recovered from the mapped point. The authors
in practical quantum computations. The authors also studied the defined a model of a quantum autoencoder to perform these oper-
process of conversion from the defect-based surface code, and they ations on quantum data. As the authors found, the parameters of
introduced a placement design for the deformation-based sur- the quantum autoencoder can be trained using classical optimiza-
face code. The results are particularly convenient for experimental tion algorithms. The authors also demonstrated the results for the
large-scale quantum computations. compression of quantum systems.
In [44], the authors studied the quantum sample complexity
of learning with errors. The authors found that there exists an 3.6. Related work
efficient quantum learning algorithm with polynomial sample and
time complexity for a learning problem. As the authors have con- On the fundaments of quantum computation and information
cluded, the results have some implications for cryptography. see the anniversary edition of [17] in [18]. For the fundamentals
In [171], the authors studied the implementation aspects of of quantum key distribution, see [175], and [176]. On the further
silicon-based surface code quantum computers. The work focused properties of quantum adders, see [19]. On the problem of opti-
on the conflict between nanometer separation for qubit–qubit mal quantum measurements for phase estimation, see [162]. On
interactions, and proposed a solution for the separation problem the problem of quantum-state estimation, see [177]. For Shor’s
by establishing the feasibility of surface code quantum computing fundamental paper on the problem of decoherence reduction in
using solid state spins. The proposed method utilizes probe spins quantum computer memory, see [64]. For a study on optimal
that are aimed for the mechanical separation, and includes a proto- states and almost optimal adaptive measurements for quantum
col for error correction due to the spins being imperfectly located. interferometry, see [154]. On the problem of optimal input states
As the authors have concluded, the defined architecture overcomes and feedback for interferometric phase estimation, see [178]. For
many of the difficulties facing solid state quantum computing, a study on maximum-likelihood estimation of quantum processes,
and provides qubit densities that are several orders of magnitude see [179]. On the problem of quantum amplitude amplification and
greater than other systems. In [147], the authors studied the so- estimation, see [180]. On the theory of open quantum systems,
called ‘‘majorana zero modes’’ that are quasiparticle excitations see [181]. On the subject of quantum measurement and control, we
in condensed matter systems. These majorana zero modes have suggest [164]. For a study on comparing, optimizing, and bench-
a crucial significance since these can be used as building blocks marking quantum-control algorithms in a unifying programming
58 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

framework, see [182]. On the problem of optimizing qubit Hamil- the implementation of quantum error correction determines the
tonian parameter estimation algorithm, see [183]. On the problem possible theoretical architectures, multiple designs exist to realize
of quantum commuting circuits and complexity see [184]. large-scale quantum architectures. Finding a universal model of
For the fundaments of fault-tolerant quantum computation by large-scale quantum computations is still an open problem [22,
anyons, see Kitaev’s paper from 2003 [148]. For a model of a fault- 61,87,104,186,200–204]. One of the most promising approaches
tolerant one way quantum computer, see [185]. For a great paper are the theoretical architectures yielded by the topological error-
on the attributes of surface codes and its applications in practi- correction framework [43,47,52,119–127,129,130,205], for further
cal large-scale quantum computation, we suggest [186]. For the results see the Related Works.
fundamentals of topological quantum computation, see [122,123].
In [121], an architectural design for a topological cluster state 4.1. Gate model quantum computers
quantum computer is proposed. For a demonstration of a quantum
error detection code using a square lattice of four superconducting In gate model quantum computers, the quantum computations
qubits, see [42]. A method for detecting bit-flip errors in a logical are performed by several layers of quantum gates. Each quantum
qubit using stabilizer measurements is proposed in [49]. About gate performs a unitary operation on the input quantum systems.
the architectures for a quantum random access memory, see [58]. The gates are applied in several rounds because of hardware re-
On the robustness of the so-called bucket brigade quantum RAM, strictions such as the no-cloning theorem that makes it impossible
see [187]. For a method of characterization of quantum devices for a given quantum system to participate in more than one quan-
with error correction, see [41]. On the problem of protecting entan- tum gate simultaneously [5]. Current practical implementations of
glement from decoherence using weak measurement and quan- gate model quantum computers (Google, MIT [5,202–204,206]) are
tum measurement reversal, see [159]. For an experimental demon- based on qubit systems with a particular qubit-to-qubit coupling
stration of topological error correction, see [51]. The problem of topology, and the achievable circuit depth depends on the fidelity
adiabatic quantum optimization for associative memory recall has of the quantum gates.
been studied in [63]. On the true precision limits of quantum In [206], the authors defined the so-called Quantum Approxi-
metrology, see [188]. For the practical implementation of high- mate Optimization Algorithm, which is a quantum algorithm for
fidelity single-shot Toffoli gate via quantum control, see [189]. the efficient solution of combinatorial optimization problems. As
A study on coherent controlization using superconducting qubits the authors defined, the quantum algorithm outputs approximate
can be found in [94]. On the optimal single-shot strategies for solutions, and the working mechanism of the algorithm depends
discrimination of quantum measurements, see [163]. In [48], the on a positive integer. As they stated, the quality of the approxima-
authors studied the estimation of coherent error sources from tion of the quantum algorithm improves as this positive integer is
stabilizer measurements. They analyzed the situations when the increased. As the authors defined, the quantum circuit consists of
qubits of a given graph state have different error channels. As the unitary gates whose locality is at most the locality of the objective
authors concluded, the possibility of reconstructing the channels function (the goal is to find the optimum of the objective func-
at all qubits depends on the topology of the graph state in a non- tions). As the authors showed, the depth of the quantum circuit
trivial way. On the subject of optimal quantum measurements of grows linearly within their framework. The authors analyzed the
expectation values of observables, see [160]. performance of the quantum algorithm on regular graphs, and
The problem of quantum computing with an always-on Heisen- concluded that it offers several benefits over the classical algo-
berg interaction is studied in [190]. In [6], the problem of rithms. In [207], the authors applied the Quantum Approximate
entanglement-free Heisenberg-limited phase estimation is stud- Optimization Algorithm to a well-defined combinatorial problem.
ied. About the problems of induced coherence, vacuum fields, and In the studied model, the input system is a set of linear equations
complementarity in biphoton generation, see [191]. About the con- each of which contains exactly three boolean variables and each
nection of Toffoli and controlled-not gates with universal quantum equation outputs that the sum of the variables mod 2 is 0 or is 1.
computation, see [192]. For a study on quantum computation and The authors showed, that their quantum algorithm will efficiently
quantum-state engineering driven by dissipation, see [193]. On the solve the input problem, and provides several additional benefits
problem of quantum imaging with undetected photons, see [194]. over the classical algorithms. In [208], the authors studied the
On biomimetic cloning of quantum observables, see [195]. On relevance of quantum supremacy, using their algorithm called
quantum control experiments for evolutionary multi-objective Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. As the authors
algorithms, see [196]. About the attributes of adaptive quantum stated this algorithm is designed to run on gate-model quantum
computation in changing environments using projective simula- computers. The algorithm takes as input a combinatorial opti-
tion, see [197]. On the subject of molecular dynamics with on- mization problem and outputs a string. As the authors stated, this
the-fly machine learning of quantum-mechanical forces, see [198]. output string satisfies a high fraction of the maximum number of
On the problem of Hamiltonian simulation with nearly optimal clauses. The authors proved that for certain problems the proposed
dependence on all parameters, see [199]. The characterization of quantum algorithm has well-characterized performance bounds.
the so-called forbidden quantum adder can be found in [74]. As the authors also showed the output distribution of the quantum
algorithm cannot be efficiently simulated on any classical device.
4. Large-Scale quantum computing This statement was further verified via the Quantum Adiabatic
Algorithm. As the authors concluded, the proposed framework
A large-scale quantum computer is desired for the realization can be run on near term quantum computers and can be used to
of complex quantum algorithms. Compared to traditional tran- demonstrate quantum supremacy. In [5], the authors studied the
sistor technologies, the structural properties of quantum devices theory of quantum algorithms for fixed qubit architectures. The
require larger physical distances (because of the physical posi- analysis is based the gate-model quantum computers. The authors
tion of quantum states in the space) and therefore larger build- developed a method for programming gate-model quantum com-
ing blocks in the physical layer. As a consequence, instead of puters without the requirement of error correction or compilation.
a large quantum computer (macro-architecture), several smaller As the authors concluded as an important consequence, the num-
quantum computers (micro-architecture) will communicate with ber of logical qubits will be equal to the number of qubits on the
each other in a particular network structure to realize distributed device. The proposed methods use a sequence of parameterized
computations. Since in the physical layer the actual model used for unitaries that sit on the qubit layout to produce quantum states
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 59

depending on those parameters. The authors also defined strate- a trapped-ion quantum computer can factor a 2048-bit integer in
gies for parameter optimization and studied the performance of less than five months.
the defined algorithms. The results are particularly important for In [209], the authors proposed a model for distributed se-
the development of quantum computers, and can be utilized well cure quantum machine learning that enables a classical client to
in the gate-model qubit quantum computer layouts. delegate a remote quantum machine learning to the quantum
In [19] an architecture of a quantum multicomputer is devel- server. The authors defined a protocol that assumes a remote
oped. The architecture of the quantum computer was optimized small-scale photon quantum computation processor. Since the
for Shor’s factoring algorithm. In the proposed model, the quantum method is based on the fundamentals of quantum mechanics, the
multicomputer is realized via a large number of nodes that are protocol is secure without leaking any relevant information to an
communicating through a quantum-bus (qubus). As the author eavesdropper. In [210], the authors studied the quantum gener-
stated, the primary metric chosen was the performance of the fac- alization of feedforward neural networks. The authors used the
torization process. As the author found, the quantum modular ex- fundamental result that classical neurons can be generalized to the
ponentiation step represents a computational bottleneck in the de- quantum case with reversibility. In this work the authors showed
velopment of the quantum architecture and it requires a solution. A that these quantum networks can be used to compress quantum
number of optimization methods have been proposed in the work states onto a minimal number of qubits, creating a quantum au-
to reduce the latency and circuit depth. As a final conclusion of the toencoder, and also useful to discover quantum communication
work, these modifications makes possible to achieve(the modular protocols such as teleportation. As the authors concluded, the
2
2
)
exponentiation
( 2 n) of an n-bit number with latency
( 3 ) O n log n or defined quantum neuron module can naturally be implemented
O n log , while the initial latency was O n . Some analysis photonically, therefore the model can also be implemented in
revealed that the proposed quantum circuits can be more than one practice. In [131], the authors studied the feasible implementation
million times faster in comparison to other exiting methods (the of quantum neural networks using quantum dots. The model is
study used a 6,000-bit number for the demonstration). based on dipole–dipole interactions. They have found that the
The model also defined five different qubus interconnect topolo- proposed implementation is both feasible and versatile. As the
gies for the construction of quantum computer networks. The authors defined, the physical implementation of framework uses
work also defined different forms of quantum adder circuits. As GaAs based quantum dot qubits coupled to a reservoir of acoustic
the authors concluded the serial links in the quantum multicom- phonons. The authors showed that the quantum coherence in the
puter structure represent an optimal solution, since, as the author defined neural networks survive for over a hundred picosec even at
concluded, the parallel links would provide only very modest liquid nitrogen temperatures (77 K). As they concluded, this result
improvements in system reliability and performance. is three orders of magnitude higher than current implementations
which are operating at temperatures in the mili Kelvin range.
4.2. Distributed topologies
4.3. Physical implementations
Because of the physical distance between the quantum states in
the space, large-scale quantum computations seem to be realized The currently implemented seven quantum technologies (ion
by distributed topologies [9,10,19]. In a distributed topology, the traps, distributed and monolithic diamonds, superconductors, lin-
smaller quantum computers communicate with each other via a ear optics, quantum dots, donor systems, and topological quan-
quantum bus (implementable by optical fibers, wireless quantum tum computing) used to realize quantum computers can be clas-
channels, etc.), and the quantum algorithms and error-correction sified into four generations [10]. The first-generation quantum
processes are also executed in a distributed manner. It requires computers are realized via ion traps, with some KhZ as physical
not just a well-designed infrastructure but also protocols of the speed and some Hz as logical speed [10,61,80–90]. The foot-
distributed quantum computations, distributed quantum applica- print ranges of these quantum computers are in mm–cm. The
tions, and quantum error correction, as well as distributed quan- second-generation quantum computers are implemented by the
tum control and measurements. Practically, the smaller quantum distributed diamonds [60,97,211–216], superconducting quantum
computers are connected via a particular system area network circuits [1,4,8,42,67,91–97], and linear optical [10,98–118] tech-
(SAN). In a SAN model, the quantum computers could have an nologies. These quantum computers could produce MhZ ranges as
arbitrary quantum hardware with diverse quantum coding ap- physical speed, and their logical speed is in the kHz domain, with
proaches, which are handled and controlled by some appropri- footprint sizes in µm–mm. The third-generation quantum comput-
ate protocols (the model also implements classical protocols). For ers are based on monolithic diamonds [51], quantum dots [75,77,
larger distances, quantum metropolitan area networks (Q-MAN) or 131–138], or donor [10,62,69,138–146] technologies. Their phys-
quantum wide area networks (Q-WAN) can be constructed. ical layer speed is in the GhZ range, while their logical speed is
In [10], the authors studied the models and methods of local in the MhZ range, with footprint sizes in nm–µm. The fourth-
and distributed quantum computation. This paper provides a great generation quantum computers use the topological quantum com-
review on the different construction methods and experimental puting technology [10,96,123,126,130,147,148] (also referred to
quantum error correction models that are relevant for the imple- as anionic quantum computing [10]). These technologies are cur-
mentation of scalable quantum computing are also studied. rently in development and continuously evolving. An important
In [80], the authors proposed a model for designing a million- impact of the fourth generation is that no active quantum error
qubit quantum computer. As the authors found, an appropriate bal- correction is needed since the system is developed to be naturally
ance is needed between the large-scale integration of components protected from decoherence. It allows the establishment of reliable
in quantum computers and the reliability of hardware technology quantum computations in practice without dedicated quantum
of quantum computers. As the authors found, this balance can be error correction. An open problem in the current fourth-generation
evaluated by appropriate modeling tools. The authors modeled implementations is the realization of distributed quantum com-
the execution of quantum logic operations on a realistic quantum puting between distant points via anionic particles [96,123,126,
hardware with limited computational resources, and provided a 130,147,148]. For the related research results, see the Related
performance simulation. The work also demonstrated the results Work subsection.
through the Shor algorithm to factor a 1,024-bit number with a In [7] the authors proposed a practical realization of a scalable
baseline budget of 1.5 million qubits. The authors concluded that Shor algorithm on quantum computers. Due to the fact that several
60 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

practical implementations of the factorization algorithm have been atom. In [218], the authors studied the method of Hamiltonian
demonstrated using different quantum computer architectures, simulation by qubitization. As the authors stated, for a specially
the general scalability of the algorithm was still not addressed given Hermitian operator the problem of Hamiltonian simulation
before this result. The authors demonstrated factoring the number is approximating the time evolution operator at a particular time
fifteen by seven qubits and four ‘‘cache-qubits’’. As the authors with a specified error. The authors revealed that this kind of Hamil-
showed the scalable Shor algorithm can be realized by an ion-trap tonian simulation is possible with a well characterized, optimal
quantum computer with success probabilities 90%. query complexity. In [219] the authors showed that if multiple
In [217] the authors proposed a novel model for the design of copies of a quantum system with particular density matrix are
superconducting flux qubit. As the authors demonstrated, their so- given, then one can create quantum coherence among different
lution provides broad-frequency tunability, strong anharmonicity, copies of the system to perform quantum principal component
high reproducibility and relaxation times in excess of 40 microsec analysis. As the authors concluded, it is particularly convenient
at its flux-insensitive point. In the developed framework the qubit result for experimental quantum computations, since revealing
dephasing at the flux-insensitive point is dominated by residual the eigenvectors corresponding to the large eigenvalues of the
thermal-photons in the readout resonator. The results provided unknown state exponentially faster than any existing algorithm.
a revisit for flux qubit to enhance coherence and reproducibil- For a study on the advances in quantum metrology, see [220].
ity in quantum circuits and quantum computer implementations. As the authors stated, quantum metrology is the study of those
In [82], the authors demonstrated a method of engineering a mod- quantum techniques that allow one to gain advantages over purely
ular quantum computer of any size from ion crystals. Since trapped classical approaches. In this work the authors reviewed some of the
atomic ions have great importance for the practical development most promising recent developments in quantum metrology. For a
of first generation quantum computers, the study of ion crystals- work on the synthesis of arbitrary quantum circuits to topological
based solutions have a crucial significance from the perspective of assembly, see [129]. In this work, the authors proposed a method
near-future practical quantum computing. The proposed solution for the efficient generation of physical quantum circuits and quan-
also studies the wiring between ion trap qubits, and the aspects tum gate implementations for quantum computers. In [221], the
of practical implementations such as experimental quantum com- authors studied the method of quantum-assisted Gaussian process
puting protocols. regression. By theory, the Gaussian processes are a widely used
In [91], the authors introduced a hardware platform to ad- model for regression problems in supervised machine learning.
dress the challenge of combination of various quantum elements As the authors found, the quantum linear systems algorithm in-
into a quantum computer. The proposed solution fuses the meth- troduced in [222] can be applied to Gaussian process regression.
ods of integrated circuit fabrication and three-dimensional circuit As the authors concluded, it leads to an exponential reduction
quantum electrodynamics (3D cQED). The authors defined the in computation time in some cases, or a polynomial increase in
multilayer microwave integrated quantum circuit (MMIQC) plat- efficiency is also possible. In [223], a quantum algorithm is defined
form to study scalable quantum computing. In [118], the authors for linear regression. The quantum algorithm is applied for fitting a
studied quantum dots in electrically controlled cavity structures. linear regression model to a given data set using the least squares
To goal of the study was to achieve the simultaneous genera- approach. As the author stated, contrary to the previous existing
tion of near-unity indistinguishability and pure single photons algorithms result in a quantum state that encodes the optimal
with high brightness. The authors demonstrated a method for on- parameters, the proposed quantum algorithm outputs classical
demand, bright and ultra-pure single photon generation. As they values. From the characteristics of the model it follows that by
have found, this type of new generation of sources open the way running it once, the fitted model can be completely determined.
to a new level of complexity and scalability in optical quantum
manipulation. 4.4. Related works
In [136], a model for an improved operation of exchange-
coupled semiconductor quantum dots is presented. As the au- A fundamental study on quantum computations with cold
thors have found, the sensitivity of exchange operations can be trapped ions from 1995 is included in [83]. For a basic work on
reduced, the dephasing effect of charge noise can also be reduced the demonstration of a fundamental quantum logic gate, see [90].
significantly in comparison to operation near a charge-state anti- A model of quantum computation with quantum dots has been
crossing. The proposed model also allows a performance improve- defined in 1998 in [135]. For the model and attributes of a silicon-
ment via rate, therefore the results are particularly convenient based nuclear spin quantum computer, see [143]. For a scheme
for fast quantum operations. In [75], an addressable fault-tolerant for efficient quantum computation with linear optics, see [103].
qubit model has been introduced that uses a natural silicon double For a study on a one-way quantum computer, see [224]. In [87],
quantum dot with a micromagnet optimally designed for fast spin an architecture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer is
control. As the authors have found, the model leads to high qubit defined. For a demonstration of an all optical quantum controlled-
fidelity (99.6%,) which is the highest reported for natural silicon NOT gate, see [108]. For the properties of quantum dynamics of
qubits, and comparable to that obtained in isotopically purified single trapped ions, see [88]. For some models of distributed quan-
silicon quantum-dot-based qubits. The results are particularly im- tum computing, see [225] from 2003. The question whether ‘Can
portant from the implementation of practical quantum computers, quantum mechanics help distributed computing?’ is discussed
since these result can be applied directly via the current devices. in [226]. On the subject of measurement-based quantum com-
In [139], the authors demonstrated a method for deterministic, putation, see [156]. An architecture of a quantum multicomputer
on-demand generation of two-qubit entangled states. The practical optimized for Shor’s factoring algorithm is developed in [227]. On
implementation is based on electron and the nuclear spin of a sin- the requirements for fault-tolerant factoring on an atom-optics
gle phosphorus atom embedded in a silicon nanoelectronic device. quantum computer, see [228].
As the authors have found, by sequentially reading the electron and For a review article on the main attributes of optical quantum
the nucleus the generated entangled states violate the Bell/CHSH computing, see In [109]. For a review on the fundamental photonic
inequality. An extension of their model also allows to implement quantum technologies, see [110]. The models of fault-tolerant ar-
a high-fidelity quantum non-demolition measurement (QND). As chitectures for superconducting qubits are studied in [93]. For
the authors have concluded, their experimental results represent a an overview on the main attributes of quantum computers from
complete control over the two-qubit Hilbert space of a phosphorus 2010, see [104]. For a work on distributed quantum computation
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 61

architecture using semiconductor nanophotonics, we suggest [76]. authors study the problem single-shot readout of a single nuclear
For the fundamentals of quantum error correction, see [45]. On spin. In [215], the problem of high-fidelity projective read-out of
the role of superconducting circuits for quantum information, we a solid-state spin quantum register is studied. In [116] the on-chip
suggest [92]. In [87], an architecture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum interference between silicon photon-pair sources is stud-
quantum computer has been defined. A method for the classical ied. For the practical realization of qubit entanglement between
control of large-scale quantum computers is discussed in [201]. ring-resonator photon-pair sources on a silicon chip, see [117].
For a definition of a scalable architecture for a room temperature In [137], the authors studied the experimental implementation of a
solid-state quantum information processor, see [51]. In [60], a two qubit logic gate in silicon. For a demonstration of single-atom
room-temperature quantum bit memory that exceeds one second electron spin qubit in silicon, see [144]. A demonstration of high-
is proposed. For the model of a large-scale modular quantum- fidelity readout and control of a nuclear spin qubit in silicon can
computer architecture with atomic memory and photonic inter- be found in [145]. For an experimental model of spin readout and
connects, see [61]. This work also proposed a large scale modular addressability of phosphorus-donor clusters in silicon, see [69].
quantum computer architecture with atomic memory and pho- In [141], the authors studied the model of surface code quantum
tonic interconnects. For a realization on storing quantum informa- computer in silicon.
tion for 30 s in a nanoelectronic device, see [62]. In [84], the authors The two-dimensional architectures for donor-based quantum
study the problem of probabilistic quantum gates between remote computing are discussed in [142]. In [211], a practical realization
atoms through interference of optical frequency qubits. On a study of heralded entanglement between solid-state qubits separated by
on T-junction multi-zone ion trap array for two-dimensional ion three meters is proposed. In [134], a layered architecture for quan-
shuttling, storage and manipulation, see [85]. In [81], the authors tum computing using quantum dots is defined. For the model of an
study the problem of high-fidelity transport of trapped-ion qubits addressable quantum dot qubit with fault-tolerant control fidelity,
through an X-junction trap array. For a discussion on fault tolerant see [77]. In [213], a loophole-free bell inequality violation has been
quantum computation with nondeterministic gates, see [105]. proposed using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometers.
For the experimental realization of atomically precise place- On the relevance of non-abelian anyons and topological quan-
ment of single dopants in silicon, see [146]. In [138], the proper- tum computation, see the review paper of [126]. In [119], the
ties of silicon quantum electronics are reviewed. In [229], some problem of fast decoders for topological quantum codes are stud-
fundamental questions on the building of quantum computers are ied. For a discussion of signatures of majorana fermions in hy-
summarized. brid superconductor–semiconductor nanowire devices, see [96].
In [114], the problem of so-called ballistic universal quantum On the discussion of topological quantum computing with a very
computation is studied. For the details of the IBM quantum com- noisy network and local error rates approaching one percent, we
puter, see [230]. In [113], a method is defined for the measurement suggest [47]. A model for the cross-level validation of topological
of a photonic qubit without destroying the state itself. In [111], the quantum circuits has been defined in [127]. A study on the fault-
model of silica-on-silicon waveguide quantum circuits is studied. tolerant renormalization group decoded for Abelian topological
For a survey on silicon quantum electronics we suggest [138]. codes can be found in [120]. The problem of mapping of topological
In [99], a study on the main properties of silicon quantum photon- quantum circuits to physical hardware is studied in [128]. For
ics is proposed. The problem of modular entanglement of atomic a discussion on majorana zero modes and topological quantum
qubits using photons and phonons is studied in [86]. computation, see [130]. The problem of minimum weight perfect
A practical implementation on coherent coupling of a super- matching of fault-tolerant topological quantum error correction is
conducting flux qubit to an electron spin ensemble in diamond is analyzed in [43]. For the fundamentals of quantum computation
proposed in [97]. The attributes of superconducting qubits poised with topological codes, see [124].
for fault-tolerant quantum computing are studied in [1]. In [42], In [234], the problem of surface code quantum computing by
a demonstration of a quantum error detection code is proposed, lattice surgery is studied. In [235], the problem of lower overhead
using a square lattice of four superconducting qubits. In [133], quantum computation is discussed. For a programmable architec-
the authors studied highly efficient single-photon sources based ture for quantum computing, see [236]. In [201], the problem of
on a quantum dots in a photonic nanowire. In [231], the authors classical control of large-scale quantum computers is studied. For
proposed an experimental generation of single photons via active the fault-tolerant thresholds for quantum error correction with the
multiplexing. For a discussion on bright solid-state sources of surface code, see [50]. In [80], the authors studied the problem
indistinguishable single photons, see [100]. In [107], the problem of designing a million-qubit quantum computer via a resource
of active temporal multiplexing of photons is studied. For a study performance simulator. In [89], the authors studied the model of
on the effect of loss on multiplexed single-photon sources, see [98]. a microwave ion trap quantum computer. In [237], the authors
For a study on the relevance of diamonds in quantum com- studied the problem of resource costs for fault-tolerant linear
puting, see [112]. For a discussion on arbitrarily complete bell- optical quantum computing. For a compiler for fault-tolerant high
state measurement using only linear optical elements, see [101]. level quantum circuits, see [205].
For a work regarding on-chip manipulation of single photons from In [238], a layered software architecture for quantum com-
a diamond defect, see [102]. In [212], practical implementation puting design tools has been defined. A method for quantum
for room-temperature entanglement between single defect spins circuit simplification and level compaction can be found in [239]. A
in diamond is demonstrated. A photonic architecture for scal- survey on quantum programming languages can be found in [240].
able quantum information processing in NV-diamond is defined In [241], a scalable quantum programming language has been
in [232]. In [233], a study on nanodiamonds in Fabry–Perot cavities proposed. A model for software design architecture and domain-
is proposed. The results are particularly important for the imple- specific language for quantum computing has been proposed
mentations of quantum computation, since the negatively-charged in [242]. For a quantum computing library for programming pur-
nitrogen-vacancy color center in diamond provides a physically poses see [243]. On the model of repeat-until-success quantum
realizable platform for quantum computation. computing using stationary and flying qubits, see [244]. On the
For a discussion on the model of charge-based silicon quantum problem of scalable error correction in distributed ion trap com-
computer architectures using controlled single-ion implantation puters, see [245]. On the problem of distributed quantum compu-
see [140]. For a study on quantum entanglement between an tation based on small quantum registers, see [246]. The problem of
optical photon and a solid-state spin qubit, see [216]. In [214], the integrated optical approach to trapped ion quantum computation
62 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

is discussed in [247]. For a discussion on quantum networks with on a particular class of hybrid quantum–classical algorithms. This
trapped ions, we suggest [248]. For a study on the recent results class is selected by its well applicability in the field of quantum
of quantum chemistry on a quantum computer, we suggest [249]. chemistry and combinatorial problems. The work also studied
On the problem of quantum annealing with manufactured spins, the application of quasi-Newton optimization methods in hybrid
see [250]. On time optimal quantum computation, see [251]. A algorithms.
study on gate-count estimates for performing quantum chemistry
on small quantum computers can be found in [252]. On the details 5.2. Computational problems
of a variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum proces-
sor, see [253]. The problem of quantum dynamics of single trapped In [273], the authors studied the quantum gradient descent for
ions is studied in [88]. On the problem of preparation of thermal linear systems and least squares. The authors defined a quantum
states of quantum systems by dimension reduction, see [254]. linear system solver that outperforms the current methods for
About the methods of preparing projected entangled pair states large families of matrices. The proposed scheme is based on an
on a quantum computer, see [255]. improved procedure for singular value estimation. The authors
provided the quantum method for performing gradient descent for
5. Quantum algorithm implementations cases where the gradient is an affine function, and in this case the
cost of the method can be exponentially smaller than the cost of
Shor’s prime factorization algorithm [11] is one of the most performing the step classically. They also provided applications of
important quantum algorithms, and it also serves as a bench- their quantum gradient descent algorithm. In [274], the authors
mark to characterize quantum computation performance [19]. The studied the problem of quantum gradient descent and Newton’s
prime factorization algorithm has been implemented by different method for constrained polynomial optimization. The problem of
physical approaches with various conditions on scalability level. gradient descent algorithms is to determine a local minima by
Quantum teleportation, quantum Fourier transform, quantum moving along the direction of steepest descent. In the Newton’s the
key distribution, quantum communication protocols [256–268], problem solution uses curvature information which can be used to
and quantum error-correction methods – which are not compu- improve the convergence process. In this work, the authors defined
tational problems, however – play a crucial role in the realization the quantum versions of these iterative optimization algorithms.
The authors applied them to some optimization problems, and as
of distributed quantum computations [9,10,19]. Their practical im-
they concluded the quantum algorithms provide an exponential
plementations are essential for any future experimental quantum
speed-up over classical algorithms.
computations, such as the development of the quantum Inter-
In [275], the authors analyzed the unified quantum no-go the-
net [269,270]. Some practically implemented quantum algorithms
orems and the transform of quantum states in a restricted set. The
belong to the quantum machine learning field [2].
authors defined general quantum transformations forbidden or
Quantum programming languages [3,10,236,240,243] are also a
permitted by the superposition principle. The authors introduced
distinct field with the purpose of developing appropriate program-
the so-called no-encoding theorem. This theorem forbids linearly
ming languages for quantum computers.
superposing of an unknown pure state and a fixed state in Hilbert
space of finite dimension. The authors proposed two general forms
5.1. Large-Scale quantum computations
include the no-cloning theorem, the no-deleting theorem, and the
no-superposing theorem as special cases. The authors also defined
Another important field is that of classical algorithmic tools
a unified scheme for presenting perfect and imperfect quantum
designed to control large-scale quantum computations [127,129,
tasks (cloning and deleting).
205,238,239,241,242,252]. These include the mechanism and pro- A demonstration of a small programmable quantum computer
cesses of distributed quantum computing such as quantum error with atomic qubits is reported in [3]. The authors demonstrated a
correction in the nodes, protocols for communication between the five-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer that can be
quantum nodes, information transfer between the nodes and the programmed in software to implement arbitrary quantum algo-
quantum bus, decoding processes, optimization procedures, and rithms by executing any sequence of universal quantum logic
many more. In both the implementation of quantum algorithms gates. As the authors have concluded the reconfiguration of the
and the use of various quantum communication protocols, classical gate sequences provides a way to implement algorithms without
information will likely be present in the system as an auxiliary altering the hardware. The authors implemented the Deutsch–
element [119,120,245]. Therefore, these quantum algorithms and Jozsa and Bernstein–Vazirani quantum algorithms with average
methods are will be rather mixed ‘‘quantum–classical’’ systems, success rates of 95% and 90%, respectively. They also performed
with the augmentation of classical information processing, than a coherent quantum Fourier transform (QFT) on five trappedion
purely quantum systems. For further references see the Related qubits for phase estimation and period finding. As the authors
Work subsection. concluded the implemented model can be scaled to larger numbers
In [271] the authors proposed strategies for quantum comput- of qubits, and can be further expanded by connecting several
ing molecular energies. The model is based on the application of modules. The results have great significance from the perspective
the variational quantum eigensolver (VQE) algorithm to the simu- of practically implementable quantum computations.
lation of molecular energies. The VQE algorithm utilizes quantum In [276] the authors studied the fast graph operations in quan-
computers to efficiently determine values with a classical opti- tum computation that uses the connection between entangled
mization routine in order to approximate ground state energies states and graph theory. In this work the authors analyzed this
of quantum systems. As the authors have concluded, the defined connection and showed that it can be used in the reverse direction
strategies make possible to reduce the quantum circuit depth for to yield a graph data structure. The authors also defined efficient al-
the implementation of the algorithm and improve the optimization gorithms for transformation and comparison operations on graphs.
of the wavefunction. As the paper concluded, there exists no classical data structure that
In [272], the authors studied the possibilities of practical op- can achieve similar performance for the set of operations studied.
timization for hybrid quantum–classical algorithms. The authors A method for an automated search for new quantum exper-
analyzed the required number of repetitions that are required for iments is introduced in [277]. The authors provided a scheme
a precise estimation, since the state preparation and measurement for the development of an algorithm that can determine new ex-
phases have to repeated multiple time. Their analysis is based perimental implementations for the creation and manipulation of
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 63

quantum systems. The provided results of the paper range from the proposed method provides a tool for an experimental realization
first implementation of a high-dimensional Greenberger–Horne– for a variety of problems. In [286], the authors studied the Simu-
Zeilinger (GHZ) state to asymmetrically entangled quantum states. lated Quantum Annealing algorithm. This algorithm samples the
The authors also concluded that new types of high-dimensional equilibrium thermal state of a Quantum Annealing (QA) Hamilto-
transformations can be determined that can perform cyclic opera- nian, and they have concluded that in some cases simulated quan-
tions. tum annealing can be exponentially faster than classical simulated
In [278] a survey on some known quantum algorithms is given. annealing.
The analysis focuses on the applications of the algorithms and not In [287], the authors studied the impossibility of classically
the technical description. The author also discusses some near- simulating the so-called one-clean-qubit Computation. By theory,
term applications of quantum algorithms in experimental quan- in the model of one-qubit quantum computation, the input state
tum computing. In [279], the authors introduced a protocol that is a completely mixed state except for a single clean qubit, and
models the biological behaviors of individuals living in a natural only a single output qubit is measured at the end of the computing.
selection scenario. As the authors found, the engineered evolution As the authors found, the proposed results weakens the complex-
of the quantum living units represents the fundamental features of ity assumption necessary for the existing impossibility results on
life. The authors concluded that the results could be useful in the classical simulation of various sub-universal quantum computing
realization of artificial life and embodied evolution with quantum models. The authors also discussed some experimental implication
technologies. In [280], the authors defined a method for quantum of the results.
singular value decomposition of non-sparse low-rank matrices. In [288], the limits on fundamental limits to computation are
The authors defined a quantum algorithm to exponentiate non- studied. In this work the fundamental limits to computation with
sparse indefinite low-rank matrices on a quantum computer. As respect to manufacturing, energy, physical space, design and ver-
the authors concluded, in some cases the proposed methods allows ification effort, and algorithms are reviewed. As it is concluded
to find the singular values and associated singular vectors expo- in the paper, engineering difficulties encountered by emerging
nentially faster than it is possible via classical algorithms. technologies may indicate yet-unknown limits. In [289], the au-
In [125], the authors defined quantum algorithms for topologi- thors studied the problem of fault-tolerant operations for universal
cal and geometric analysis of data. The authors developed quantum blind quantum computation. As the authors emphasized, blind
algorithms for the identification of some topological features for quantum computation is an appealing use of quantum information
information extraction processes applied on large data sets. The technology because it can conceal both the client’s data and the
algorithm itself from the server. The authors defined a protocol
proposed quantum algorithms also can be used for finding eigen-
to reduce the client’s computational load by transferring the qubit
vectors and eigenvalues. As the authors concluded, the defined
preparation to the server. In the proposed model, for each logical
quantum algorithms can provide an exponential speedup over
qubit used in the computation, the client is only required to receive
classical algorithms for topological data analysis.
eight logical qubits via teleportation then buffer two logical qubits
In [281], the authors studied the methods of efficient phase
before returning one. As the authors concluded, this protocol can
estimation. The authors defined an efficient adaptive algorithm for
protect the client’s fault-tolerant preparation of logical qubits from
phase estimation. The main novelty of the proposed solution is that
some attacks.
their algorithm does not require that the user infer the bits of the
In [290], the authors studied the problem of simulating chem-
eigenphase in reverse order. The defined method directly infers
istry efficiently on fault-tolerant quantum computers. As the au-
the phase and estimates the uncertainty in the phase directly from
thors emphasized this kind of analysis is important since quantum
experimental data. As the authors concluded, the introduced algo-
computers can in principle simulate quantum physics exponen-
rithm can be applied in the presence of substantial decoherence
tially faster than their classical counterparts. The authors defined
with the same speed as the original phase estimation methods. methods for chemical simulation algorithms computationally fast
In [282], the authors studied the quantum perceptron models, and on fault-tolerant quantum computers. The authors discussed some
analyzed how quantum computation can provide improvements methods for constructing arbitrary gates which perform substan-
in the computational and statistical complexity of the perceptron tially faster than some circuits. As the authors concluded, for a
model. The authors defined two quantum algorithms for this pur- given approximation error, arbitrary single-qubit gates can be pro-
pose. As the authors found, improvements can be achieved through duced fault-tolerantly in an efficient way. On quantum metropolis
the application of quantum amplitude amplification to the version sampling, see [291]. In this work, the authors analyzed that how
space interpretation of the perceptron model. a quantum version of the so-called Metropolis algorithm can be
In [283], the authors used the Instantaneous Quantum Polyno- implemented on a quantum computer. As the authors stated, the
mial time class of commuting quantum computations to strengthen Metropolis algorithm permits to sample directly from the eigen-
the conjecture that quantum computers are hard to simulate states of the Hamiltonian and thus evades the some problems that
classically. As the authors found, if either of two plausible average- crucial in classical simulations.
case hardness conjectures holds, then these class of computations In [292], the authors defined a quantum algorithm for data
are hard to simulate classically up to constant additive error. The fitting. As the authors showed, the proposed quantum algorithm
authors also analyzed the problem using spin-based generaliza- can efficiently determine the quality of a least-squares fit over an
tions of the Boson Sampling problem. exponentially large data set. The method is based on the problem
In [284], the authors defined quantum algorithms for solving of solving systems of linear equations efficiently, which problem
two problems connected to stochastic processes. The first algo- was also addressed in [222]. As the authors found, in some cases
rithm prepares the thermal Gibbs state of a quantum system, the algorithm can also efficiently find a concise function that ap-
the second algorithm estimates the hitting time of a Markov proximates the data to be fitted and bound the approximation
chain. As the authors concluded, the proposed quantum algorithms error. The authors concluded, in some cases where the input data
are useful for Hamiltonian simulation, spectral gap amplification, is a pure quantum state, the algorithm can be used to provide
and solving linear systems of equations. In [285], the authors an efficient parametric estimation of the quantum state. As an
studied the problem of digital quantum simulation of many-body important practical application of the quantum algorithm with
non-Markovian dynamics. The authors defined an algorithmic pure state inputs, the authors showed that it can be applied as an
framework for the digital quantum simulation of many-body non- alternative to full quantum state tomography given a fault tolerant
Markovian open quantum systems. As the authors concluded, the quantum computer.
64 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

In [222], the authors defined a quantum algorithm for linear accurate results increases as the system is approaches criticality.
systems of equations. As the authors stated, the problem of solving In [297], the authors studied the estimation methods of effective
linear systems of equations can be significantly improved with temperatures in quantum annealers for sampling applications. The
the help of quantum computations. The authors considered a case work also extended the analysis to some applications in machine
where it is not needed to know the solution itself, but rather an learning. The authors introduced a model to overcome the problem
approximation of the expectation value of some operator asso- of effectively using a quantum annealer for Boltzmann sampling.
ciated with the solution. As the results concluded the proposed Their solution is based on a simple effective-temperature estima-
quantum algorithm provides an exponential improvement over tion algorithm. The work also provided an analysis on the impacts
the best classical algorithm. of the effective temperatures in the learning of a some Boltzmann
machines that were embedded on quantum hardware, and defined
further algorithmical solutions for the quantum domain. In [298],
5.3. Quantum machine learning
the authors studied the quantum Boltzmann machine, and showed
a new machine learning approach based on quantum Boltzmann
Since quantum artificial intelligence and quantum machine
distribution. The authors studied the problem of training of quan-
learning are emerging fields [2], the study of these protocols has
tum Boltzmann machines that is a non-trivial problem. The authors
a crucial significance for experimental quantum information pro- defined bounds on the quantum probabilities that allows us to
cessing. In [95] the authors studied the implementation of some train it efficiently by sampling. The authors concluded the results
basic protocols of quantum reinforcement learning using super- with some examples and analyzed the possibility of using quantum
conducting quantum circuits. Superconducting quantum circuits annealing processors like D-Wave for the training of a quantum
are provide an implementable technique for the practical realiza- Boltzmann machine. In [299], the authors studied the quantum
tion of quantum computations and quantum information process- annealer driven data discovery. The authors defined experiments
ing. In this work, the authors defined some scenarios for proof-of- for quantum annealers and compared the results to the methods
principle experiments using the currently available superconduct- of machine learning. The authors studied a binary classifier that
ing circuit technologies. utilizes a quantum annealer to produce a more robust class estima-
A model for the practical demonstration of the quantum ad- tor. The authors also provided a detailed discussion of algorithmic
vantages in machine learning in included in [293]. In this work constraints and trade-offs imposed by the use of their hardware
the authors showed that an oracle-based problem (learning parity model.
with noise), can be solved and implemented by a five-qubit super- In [161] the authors studied the models of quantum machine
conducting processor. As the authors practically demonstrated that learning that requires no quantum measurements. The authors de-
theoretically known results that there is a large gap in query count fined a quantum machine learning algorithm for efficiently solving
between the classical and quantum algorithms on a particular a class of problems encoded in unitary operations. In the proposed
oracle. The authors concluded that the achievable gap increased model, an iteration process is defined that uses a quantum time-
by orders of magnitude as a function of the error rates and the delayed equation for dynamics feedback such that the method
requires no the implementation of quantum measurements. As
problem size. As the authors have also concluded, complex fault-
the paper concluded, the application of time-delayed equations
tolerant architectures needed for experimental universal quantum
significantly can enhance some methods in experimental quan-
computing.
tum machine learning. In [300], the authors studied the methods
In [294], the authors studied quantum recommendation sys-
of quantum-enhanced machine learning. The authors defined an
tems. As the authors found, the proposed algorithm provides good approach for the application of machine learning in quantum in-
recommendations by sampling efficiently from an approximation formation processing. The authors also revealed that it is possible
of a preference matrix. Their method does not require the re- to achieve quadratic improvements in learning efficiency via the
construction of the entire matrix. As the authors concluded, their model. They also showed that the model makes possible to achieve
scheme is the first algorithm for recommendation systems that exponential improvements in performance over limited time pe-
runs in time polylogarithmic in the dimensions of the matrix and riods. As a general conclusion of the paper, the model is well-
provides an example of a quantum machine learning algorithm for applicable for a broad class of learning problems in quantum in-
a real world application. formation processing. In [301], the authors studied a fast machine-
In [295], the authors studied a quantum–classical deep learn- learning online optimization scheme for of ultra-cold-atom ex-
ing framework for industrial datasets in near-term devices. The periments. The authors defined an online optimization algorithm
authors defined a hybrid quantum–classical framework with the based on Gaussian processes and applied it to optimization of the
potential of tackling high-dimensional real-world machine learn- production of Bose–Einstein condensates (BEC). They utilized the
ing datasets on continuous variables. In the proposed scheme, the fundaments of machine learning to build up a statistical model
authors used deep learning to extract a low-dimensional binary of some parameters that are connected to the condensates. They
representation of data. As the authors concluded, the proposed also showed that the internal model developed can be used to
model is suitable for relatively small quantum processors which determine which parameters are essential in BEC creation which
can assist the training of an unsupervised generative model. The results are particularly convenient for an experimental setting.
authors also proposed an experimental demonstration on a real- In [302], the authors studied quantum algorithms for supervised
world dataset, and illustrated the proposed concept on a quantum and unsupervised machine learning. Their analysis provides al-
gorithms for cluster assignment and cluster finding. The results
annealer. A method for learning thermodynamics with Boltzmann
are particularly important for quantum artificial intelligence, since
machines (stochastic neural network in machine learning applica-
Quantum machine learning can provide exponential speed-up over
tions) is proposed in [296]. The authors introduced a Boltzmann
classical learning algorithms.
machine that is capable of modeling thermodynamic observables
for physical systems in thermal equilibrium. As a main novelty 5.4. Optimization problems
of the paper, the authors used unsupervised learning to train the
Boltzmann machine on data sets constructed with spin configura- A study on the theory of variational hybrid quantum–classical
tions. As the authors concluded, the trained Boltzmann machine algorithms can be found in [303]. In this paper the authors ex-
can be applied to generate spin states. The authors also showed tended the general theory of the quantum–classical hybrid opti-
that this machine can faithfully reproduce the observables of a mization algorithm using the framework of the so-called ‘‘quan-
physical system, and that the number of neurons required to obtain tum variational eigensolver’’ algorithm. The authors suggested
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 65

algorithmic improvements for practical implementations, and in- in [319]. About the implementation of the Deutsch–Jozsa algorithm
troduced the quantum variational error suppression method that on an ion-trap quantum computer, see [320]. On the problem of
makes possible to suppress the errors in the quantum devices. The pattern recognition on a quantum computer, we suggest [321]. For
paper also defined a method for free optimization techniques, and a study on predicting crystal structures with data mining of quan-
it concluded that these solutions can reduce the computational tum calculations, see [322]. About quantum optimally controlled
costs up to three orders of magnitude over previously used opti- transition landscapes, see [323]. About the demonstration of two-
mization techniques. qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor, we
A prediction method by linear regression on a quantum com- suggest [4]. A quantum algorithm for preparing thermal Gibbs
puter is studied in [304]. The proposed algorithm of the authors states-detailed analysis can be found in [324]. For a survey on
is based on a linear regression model with least squares optimiza- quantum machine learning, see [2]. For a review on quantum learn-
tion. As the authors concluded, the results can be accessed via a ing theory, we suggest [325]. For a review on quantum machine
single qubit measurement, and the runtime is logarithmic in the learning and quantum artificial intelligence, see [326]. The prin-
dimension of the input space. ciples of quantum artificial intelligence are greatly summarized
In [305], the authors defined genetic algorithms to enhance the in [327]. On quantum learning by measurement and feedback,
versatility of digital quantum simulations. The authors found, that see [157]. On the problem of improved lower bound on query
genetic algorithms can be used to increase the fidelity of quantum complexity for some quantum learning problems, see [328]. On
states, and to optimize the resource requirements of some digital a study about quantum learning algorithms for quantum mea-
quantum simulation protocols. The authors demonstrated the re- surements, see [155]. For a study on quantum adiabatic machine
sults via a modular gate made out of imperfect quantum gates. learning, see [329]. For an optimal quantum algorithm for the
In [306], the authors defined a quantum support vector machine oracle identification problem, see [330].
for big data classification. As the authors found, the support vec- On the subject of quantum deep learning, see [331]. For an
tor machine (an optimized binary classifier) can be implemented introduction to quantum machine learning, see also [332]. The
on a quantum computer. As they showed, the complexity of the method of fidelity-based probabilistic quantum learning for con-
quantum algorithm is logarithmic in the size of the vectors and trol of quantum systems is studied in [333]. In [334], the problem
the number of training examples. As they concluded, the quantum of human-level control through deep reinforcement learning is
algorithm in some cases (if classical sampling algorithms require studied. For a study on the experimental realization of a quan-
polynomial time) achieves an exponential speed-up compared to tum support vector machine, see [335]. In [336], the method
of entanglement-based machine learning on a quantum com-
the classical algorithms.
puter is studied. On some advances in quantum machine learning,
In [307], the authors studied the Solovay–Kitaev algorithm and
see [337]. In [338], the problem of quantum learning in a noisy
its optimization in quantum computations. As the authors empha-
environment is studied. In [339], the problem of quantum gate
sized, the Solovay–Kitaev algorithm is a useful tool for the approx-
learning in qubit networks is studied. The problem of quantum
imation of arbitrary single-qubit gates for fault-tolerant quantum
inspired training for Boltzmann machines is discussed in [340].
computation. The authors defined the so-called ‘‘search space ex-
On the problem of tomography and generative data modeling
pansion’’ approach to modify the initial stage of the algorithm.
via quantum Boltzmann training, see [341]. About the challenges
As the authors found, after some steps the algorithm allows to
of physical implementations of RBMs (restricted Boltzmann ma-
reduce the requirements of quantum error correction for quantum
chines), see [342]. About the role of evolutionary algorithms for
algorithms in experimental quantum computations.
hard quantum control, see [343]. For a quantum algorithm for
For a study on the size dependence of the minimum excita-
association rules mining, see [344]. For a comparison of classical
tion gap in the quantum adiabatic algorithm, see [308]. On the
and quantum machine learning, see [345]. The field of quantum
problem of quantum adiabatic optimization algorithm and local
machine learning is reviewed from a classical perspective in [346].
minima, see [309]. On the problem of sampling from the thermal On the connection of deep learning and quantum entanglement,
quantum Gibbs state and evaluating partition functions with a see [347]. For a discussion on the transformation of the Bell-
quantum computer, see [310]. On the problem of the first-order inequalities into state classifiers with machine learning, see [106].
phase transition in the quantum adiabatic algorithm, see [311]. For further analysis on the opportunities and challenges of quan-
About the problems of adiabatic condition and the quantum hitting tum machine learning in near-term quantum computers, see [348].
time of Markov chains, see [312]. A method of sequential quantum On the problem of separability-entanglement classifier, see [349].
mixing for slowly evolving Markov chains can be found in [313]. For a discussion of quantum dot neural networks, see [132].
For the description of a quantum–quantum metropolis algorithm, In [270], a review on the characterization of the quantum Inter-
see [314]. On the properties of a quantum adiabatic evolution net is given. The paper reviews the physical aspects of quantum
algorithm applied to random instances of an NP-complete prob- networking, quantum connectivity, and the physical-layer optical
lem, see [315]. About the performance of the quantum adiabatic interactions of single photons and atoms. On the problem of expo-
algorithm on random instances of two optimization problems on nential separation of quantum and classical one-way communica-
regular hypergraphs, see [316]. tion complexity, see [350]. For a study on parallel photonic infor-
For a study about training a binary classifier with the quan- mation processing at gigabyte per second data rates using transient
tum adiabatic algorithm, see [203]. About the problem of train- states, see [351]. The problem of quantum inference on Bayesian
ing a large scale classifier with the quantum adiabatic algorithm, networks is studied in [352]. On the solution of the quantum many-
see [202]. For a practical demonstration of binary classification body problem with artificial neural networks, see [353]. For a
using hardware implementation of quantum annealing, see [317]. quantum generalization of feedforward neural networks, see [354].
About the problem of large scale classifier training with adiabatic For a study on the equivalences and separations between quan-
quantum optimization, see [204]. On the subject of robust classifi- tum and classical learnability, see [355]. For a study on quantum
cation with adiabatic quantum optimization, see [318]. algorithms for some hidden shift problems, see [356]. About the
problem of polynomial quantum algorithm for approximating the
5.5. Related work Jones polynomial, see [357]. On the problem of quantum simu-
lations of classical annealing processes, see [358]. For a discrete-
An experimental realization of Shor’s quantum factoring al- query quantum algorithm for NAND trees, see [359]. For the char-
gorithm via nuclear magnetic resonance has been demonstrated acterization of a quantum algorithm for approximating partition
66 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

functions, see [360]. For a discussion on super-polynomial quan- [8] N. Ofek, et al., Extending the lifetime of a quantum bit with error correction
tum speed-ups for boolean evaluation trees with hidden structure, in superconducting circuits, Nature 536 (2016) 441–445.
[9] R. Van Meter, Quantum Networking, Wiley-ISTE, 2014.
see [361].
[10] R. Van Meter, S.J. Devitt, Local and distributed quantum computation, IEEE
In [362], the properties of a preconditioned quantum linear Comput. 49 (9) (2016) 31–42, arXiv:1605.06951v1.
system algorithm are discussed. For the study on quantum linear [11] P.W. Shor, Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete
systems algorithm with exponentially improved dependence on logarithms on a quantum computer, SIAM J. Comput. 26 (5) (1997) 1484–
precision, see [363]. On the problem of quantum mixing of Markov 1509.
[12] R. Rivest, A. Shamir, L. Adleman, A method for obtaining digital signatures
chains for special distributions, see [364]. For Scott Aaronson’s
and public-key cryptosystems, Commun. ACM 21 (2) (1978) 120–126.
note on the actual challenges of quantum information processing, [13] J. Proos, C. Zalka, Shor’s discrete logarithm quantum algorithm for elliptic
see [200]. The problem of prediction by linear regression on a quan- curves, 2004, arXiv:quant-ph/0301141v2.
tum computer is discussed in [304]. In [365], the authors defined a [14] S. Imre, L. Gyongyosi, Advanced Quantum Communications – An Engineering
quantum linear system algorithm for dense matrices, and analyzed Approach, Wiley-IEEE Press, 2013.
[15] S. Imre, F. Balazs, Quantum Computing and Communications – An Engineer-
the complexity of the algorithm. On the problem of estimation of ing Approach, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2005.
effective temperatures in quantum annealers, see [297]. In [366], [16] S. Imre, Quantum communications: explained for communication engi-
the problem of high-dimensional global optimization for noisy neers, IEEE Commun. Mag. 51 (08) (2013).
quantum dynamics is studied. On the problem of quantum secret [17] M.A. Nielsen, I.L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information,
sharing, see [367]. For a discussion on fast quantum Byzantine Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[18] M.A. Nielsen, I.L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information,
agreement, see [368]. For a study on experimental quantum private Cambridge University Press, 2010.
queries with linear optics, see [369]. On the problem of quan- [19] R. Van Meter, Architecture of a Quantum Multicomputer Optimized for
tum communication complexity of establishing a shared reference Shor’states Factoring Algorithm, (Ph.D. thesis), Keio University, 2006, arXiv:
frame, see [370]. On the problem of reference frames, superselec- quant-ph/0607065.
[20] C.H. Bennett, Logical reversibility of computation, IBM J. Res. Dev. 17 (1973)
tion rules, see [371]. On the problem of spatial reference frame
525–532.
agreement in quantum networks, see [372]. In [115], a method for [21] D.P. DiVincenzo, The physical implementation of quantum computation,
chip-based quantum key distribution is defined. Fortschr. Phys. 48 (9–11) (2000) 771–783.
A method for quantum clock synchronization based on shared [22] S. Aaronson, A. Arkhipov, The computational complexity of linear optics,
prior entanglement is detailed in [373]. In [374], a quantum algo- in: Proceedings of the Forty-third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of
Computing, STOC ’11, ACM, San Jose, California, USA, 2011, pp. 333–342.
rithm for distributed clock synchronization is defined. A quantum-
[23] S. Aaronson, The learnability of quantum states, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A
enhanced positioning and clock synchronization method has been Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 463 (2088) (2007) 3089–3114.
discussed in [375]. The problem of entangled quantum clocks [24] D. Deutsch. Quantum theory, The Church-Turing principle and the universal
for measuring proper-time difference is discussed in [158]. An quantum omputer, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 400 (1985) 97–117.
efficient algorithm for optimizing adaptive quantum metrology [25] R. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Internat. J. Theoret. Phys.
21 (1982) 467–488.
processes is defined in [376]. On the problem of differential evo- [26] W.K. Wootters, W.H. Zurek, A single quantum cannot be cloned, Nature 299
lution for many-particle adaptive quantum metrology, see [377]. (5886) (1982) 802–803.
For the description of the quantum generative adversarial learning [27] R. Penrose, The Emperor’states New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds
method, see [378]. A scheme on the classification with gate-model and the Laws of Physics, Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, NY, USA,
quantum neural networks can be found in [379]. ISBN: 0-19-851973-7, 1989.
[28] W.G. Unruh, Maintaining coherence in quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 51
(1995) 992–997.
6. Conclusions [29] B. Schumacher, Quantum coding, Phys. Rev. A 51 (1995) 2738.
[30] C.H. Bennett, E. Bernstein, G. Brassard, U. Vazirani, Strengths and weaknesses
Here we reviewed the most recent papers and research direc- of quantum computing, SIAM J. Comput. 26 (5) (1997) 1510–1523.
[31] E. Bernstein, U. Vazirani, Quantum complexity theory, SIAM J. Comput. 26
tions on quantum computing technology. We listed the building
(5) (1997) 1411–1473.
blocks of quantum computers, the conditions of the development [32] M. Mosca, Quantum algorithms, 2008, Arxiv preprint arXiv:0808.0369.
of large-scale quantum computers, and the most recent research [33] A.M. Childs, W. van Dam, Quantum algorithms for algebraic problems, Rev.
results on the physical implementation of quantum devices, com- Modern Phys. 82 (2010) 1–52.
puters, and algorithms. We also addressed some open problems of [34] D. Bacon, W. van Dam, Recent progress in quantum algorithms, Commun.
ACM 53 (2) (2010) 84–93.
the field. The results are encouraging, and the conclusion of this
[35] R. Jozsa, N. Linden, On the role of entanglement in quantum-computational
paper is positive. Quantum information processing, by exploiting speed-up, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 459 (2036) (2003)
the fundamental nature of information, opens new possibilities in 2011–2032.
computing, networking, and communications. Quantum comput- [36] F. Verstraete, V. Murg, J.I. Cirac. Matrix product states, projected entangled
ing technologies continue to hold tremendous potential for future pair states and variational renormalization group methods for quantum spin
systems, Adv. Phys. 57 (2) (2008) 143–224.
computations and communications.
[37] D. Shepherd, M.J. Bremner, Temporally unstructured quantum computation,
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 465 (2105) (2009) 1413–1439.
References [38] A. Broadbent, J. Fitzsimons, E. Kashefi, Universal blind quantum computa-
tion, in: 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer
[1] R. Barends, et al., Logic gates at the surface code threshold: Superconducting Science, 2009, pp. 517–526.
qubits poised for fault-tolerant quantum computing, Nature 508 (2014) [39] E. Kashefi, A. Pappa, Multiparty delegated quantum computing, 2016, arXiv:
500–503. 1606.09200.
[2] J. Biamonte, et al., Quantum machine learning, Nature 549 (2017) 195–202. [40] M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, Franco Nori, Franco nori quantum simulation, Rev.
[3] S. Debnath, et al., Demonstration of a small programmable quantum com- Modern Phys. 86 (2014) 153–185.
puter with atomic qubits, Nature 536 (2016) 63–66. [41] J. Combes, et al., In-situ characterization of quantum devices with error
[4] L. DiCarlo, et al., Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a supercon- correction, 2014, arXiv:1405.5656.
ducting quantum processor, Nature 460 (2009) 240–244. [42] A.D. Corcoles, et al., Demonstration of a quantum error detection code using
[5] E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, H. Neven, Quantum algorithms for fixed a square lattice of four superconducting qubits, Nature Commun. 6 (2015)
qubit architectures, 2017, arXiv:1703.06199v1. 6979.
[6] B.L. Higgins, D.W. Berry, S.D. Bartlett, H.M. Wiseman, G.J. Pryde, [43] A.G. Fowler, Minimum weight perfect matching of fault-tolerant topological
Entanglement-free Heisenberg-limited phase estimation, Nature 450 quantum error correction in average o(1) parallel time, Quant. Inf. Comp. 15
(2007) 393–396. (0145–0158) (2015).
[7] T. Monz, et al., Realization of a scalable shor algorithm, Science 351 (2016) [44] A.B. Grilo, I. Kerenidis, Learning with errors is easy with quantum samples,
1068–1070. 2017, arXiv:1702.08255.
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 67

[45] D.A. Lidar, T.A. Brun (Eds.), Quantum Error Correction, Cambridge University [79] R. Van Meter, Quantum computing’s classical problem, classical computing’s
Press, 2013. quantum problem, Found. Phys. 44 (8) (2014) 819–828.
[46] S. Nagayama, A.G. Fowler, D. Horsman, S.J. Devitt, R. Van Meter, Surface code [80] M. Ahsan, R. Van Meter, J. Kim, Designing a million-qubit quantum computer
error correction on a defective lattice, New J. Phys. (2017). using resource performance simulator, 2015, arXiv:1512.00796.
[47] N.H. Nickerson, Y. Li, S.C. Benjamin, Topological quantum computing with [81] R.B. Blakestad, C. Ospelkaus, A.P. VanDevender, J.M. Amini, J. Britton,
a very noisy network and local error rates approaching one percent, Nature D. Leibfried, D.J.Wineland, High-fidelity transport of trapped-ion qubits
Commun. 4 (2013) 1756. through an x-junction trap array, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 153002.
[48] D. Orsucci, M. Tiersch, H.J. Briegel, Estimation of coherent error sources from [82] K.R. Brown, J. Kim, C. Monroe, Co-designing a scalable quantum computer
stabilizer measurements, Phys. Rev. A 93 (2016) 042303. with trapped atomic ions, 2016, arXiv:1602.02840.
[49] D. Riste, et al., Detecting bit-flip errors in a logical qubit using stabilizer [83] J.I. Cirac, P. Zoller, Quantum computations with cold trapped ions, Phys. Rev.
measurements, Nature Commun. 6 (2015) 6983. Lett. 74 (1995) 4091.
[50] A.M. Stephens, Fault-tolerant thresholds for quantum error correction with [84] L.M. Duan, M.J. Madsen, D.L. Moehring, P. Maunz, R.N. Kohn Jr., C. Monroe,
the surface code, Phys. Rev. A. 89 (2014) 022321. Probabilistic quantum gates between remote atoms through interference of
[51] N.Y. Yao, L. Jiang, A.V. Gorshkov, P.C. Maurer, G. Giedke, J.I. Cirac, M.D. optical frequency qubits, Phys. Rev. A. 73 (2006) 062324.
Lukin, Scalable architecture for a room temperature solid-state quantum [85] W.K. Hensinger, S. Olmschenk, D. Stick, D. Hucul, M. Yeo, M. Acton, L.
information processor, Nature Commun. 3 (2012) 800. Deslauriers, J. Rabchuk, C. Munro, T-junction multi-zone ion trap array for
[52] X.C. Yao, et al., Experimental demonstration of topological error correction, two-dimensional ion shuttling, storage and manipulation, Appl. Phys. Lett.
Nature 482 (2012) 489. 88 (2006) 034101.
[53] S. Bravyi, D. Gosset, R. Koenig, Quantum advantage with shallow circuits, [86] D. Hucul, I.V. Inlek, G. Vittorini, C. Crocker, S. Debnath, S.M. Clark, C. Monroe,
2017, arXiv:1704.00690. Modular entanglement of atomic qubits using photons and phonons, Nat.
[54] M.J. Bremner, A. Montanaro, D.J. Shepherd, Achieving quantum supremacy Phys. 11 (2014) 37–42.
with sparse and noisy commuting quantum computations, Quantum 1 (1) [87] D. Kielpinski, C. Monroe, D.J. Wineland, Architecture for a large-scale ion-
(2017) 8. trap quantum computer, Nature 417 (2002) 709.
[55] E. Zahedinejad, J. Ghosh, B.C. Sanders, Designing high-fidelity single-shot [88] D. Leibfried, R. Blatt, C. Monroe, D. Wineland, Quantum dynamics of single
three-qubit gates: A machine-learning approach, Phys. Rev. Appl. 6 (2016) trapped ions, Rev. Modern Phys. 75 (281–324) (2003).
054005. [89] B. Lekitsch, S. Weidt, A.G. Fowler, K. Moolmer, S.J. Devitt, C. Wunderlich, W.K.
[56] E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, J. Preskill, Topological quantum memory, J. Hensinger, Blueprint for a microwave ion trap quantum computer, 2015,
Math. Phys. 43 (2002) 4452–4505. arxiv:1508.00420.
[57] M. August, X. Ni, Using recurrent neural networks to optimize dynamical [90] C. Monroe, D.M. Meekhof, B.E. King, W.M. Itano, D.J.Wineland, Demonstra-
decoupling for quantum memory, Phys. Rev. A 95 (2017) 012335. tion of a fundamental quantum logic gate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 4714.
[58] V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, Architectures for a quantum random [91] T. Brecht, W. Pfaff, C. Wang, Y. Chu, L. Frunzio, M.H. Devoret, R.J. Schoelkopf,
access memory, Phys. Rev. A 78 (5) (2008) 052310. Multilayer microwave integrated quantum circuits for scalable quantum
[59] V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, Quantum random access memory, Phys. computing, Npj Quantum Inf. 2 (2016) 16002.
Rev. Lett. 100 (16) (2008) 160501. [92] M.H. Devoret, R.J. Schoelkopf, Superconducting circuits for quantum infor-
[60] P.C. Maurer, et al., Room-temperature quantum bit memory exceeding one mation: An outlook, Science 339 (2013) 1169.
second, Science 336 (6086) (2012) 1283–1286, 06. [93] D.P. DiVincenzo, Fault-tolerant architectures for superconducting qubits,
[61] C. Monroe, R. Raussendorf, A. Ruthven, K.R. Brown, P. Maunz, L.M. Duan, Phys. Scr. T 137 (2009).
J. Kim, Large-scale modular quantum-computer architecture with atomic [94] N. Friis, A.A. Melnikov, G. Kirchmair, H.J. Briegel, Coherent controlization
memory and photonic interconnects, Phys. Rev. A 89 (2014) 022317. using superconducting qubits, Sci. Rep. (2015).
[62] Juha T. Muhonen, et al., Storing quantum information for 30 s in a nanoelec- [95] L. Lamata, Basic protocols in quantum reinforcement learning with super-
tronic device, Nat. Nano 9 (12) (2014) 986–991, 12. conducting circuits, Sci. Rep. (ISSN: 2045-2322) 7 (1) (2017) 1609.
[63] H. Seddiqi, T.S. Humble, Adiabatic quantum optimization for associative [96] V. Mourik, K. Zuo, S.M. Frolov, S.R. Plissard, E.P.A.M. Bakkers, L.P.
memory recall, Front. Phys. 2 (2014) 79, arXiv:1407.1904. Kouwenhoven, Signatures of majorana fermions in hybrid superconductor-
[64] P.W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, semiconductor nanowire devices, Science 336 (2012) 1003–1007.
Phys. Rev. A 52 (1995) 2493. [97] X. Zhu, S. Saito, A. Kemp, K. Kakuyanagi, S. Karimoto, H. Nakano, W.J. Munro,
[65] S. Santra, O. Shehab, R. Balu, Exponential capacity of associative memories Y. Tokura, M.S. Everitt, K. Nemoto, M. Kasu, N. Mizuochi, K. Semba, Coherent
under quantum annealing recall, 2016, arXiv:1602. coupling of a superconducting flux qubit to an electron spin ensemble in
[66] P. Pfeiffer, I.L. Egusquiza, M. Di Ventra, M. Sanz, E. Solano, Quantum mem- diamond, Nature 478 (2011) 221–224.
ristors, Sci. Rep. 6 (2016) 29507. [98] D. Bonneau, G.J. Mendoza, J.L. O’Brien, M.G. Thompson, Effect of loss on
[67] J. Salmilehto, F. Deppe, M. Di Ventra, M. Sanz, E. Solano, Quantum memristors multiplexed single-photon sources, New J. Phys. 17 (4) (2015) 043057.
with superconducting circuits, Sci. Rep. 7 (2017) 42044. [99] D. Bonneau, J.W. Silverstone, M.G. Thompson, Silicon Photonics III: Systems
[68] S.N. Shevchenko, Y.V. Pershin, F. Nori, Qubit-based memcapacitors and me- and Applications, chapter Silicon Quantum Photonics, Springer Berlin City,
minductors, Phys. Rev. Appl. 6 (2016) 014006. Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2016, pp. 41–82.
[69] H. Buch, S. Mahapatra, R. Rahman, A. Morello, M.Y. Simmons, Spin readout [100] O. Gazzano, S. Michaelis de Vasconcellos, C. Arnold, A. Nowak, E. Galopin,
and addressability of phosphorus-donor clusters in silicon, Nature Commun. I. Sagnes, L. Lanco, A. Lemaitre, P. Senellart, Bright solid-state sources of
4 (2013) 06. indistinguishable single photons, Nature Commun. 4 (2013) 1425, 02.
[70] G. Gatti, D. Barberena, M. Sanz, E. Solano, Protected state transfer via an [101] W.P. Grice, Arbitrarily complete Bell-state measurement using only linear
approximate quantum adder, Sci. Rep. 7 (2017) 6964. optical elements, Phys. Rev. A 84 (4) (2011) 042331–, 10.
[71] L. Lamata, U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, J.D. Martin-Guerrero, M. Sanz, E. Solano, [102] J.E. Kennard, J.P. Hadden, L. Marseglia, I. Aharonovich, S. Castelletto, B.R.
Quantum autoencoders via quantum adders with genetic algorithms, 2017, Patton, A. Politi, J.C.F. Matthews, A.G. Sinclair, B.C. Gibson, S. Prawer, J.G.
arXiv:1709.07409v1. Rarity, J.L. O’Brien, On-chip manipulation of single photons from a diamond
[72] R. Li, U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, L. Lamata, E. Solano, Approximate quantum defect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (21) (2013) 213603–, 11.
adders with genetic algorithms: An IBM quantum experience, Quantum [103] E. Knill, R. Laflamme, G.J. Milburn, A scheme for efficient quantum compu-
Meas. Quantum Metrol. 4 (2017) 1. tation with linear optics, Nature 409 (2001) 46.
[73] T.D. Nguyen, R. Van Meter, A space-efficient design for reversible floating [104] T.D. Ladd, F. Jelezko, R. Laflamme, Y. Nakamura, C. Monroe, J.L. O’Brien,
point adder in quantum computing, 2013, arXiv:1306.3760. Quantum computers, Nature 464 (2010) 45–53.
[74] U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, M. Sanz, L. Lamata, E. Solano, The forbidden quantum [105] Y. Li, S.D. Barrett, T.M. Stace, S.C. Benjamin, Fault tolerant quantum computa-
adder, Sci. Rep. 5 (2015) 11983. tion with nondeterministic gates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (25) (2010) 250502–,
[75] K. Takeda, J. Kamioka, T. Otsuka, J. Yoneda, T. Nakajima, M.R. Delbecq, S. 12.
Amaha, G. Allison, T. Kodera, S. Oda, S. Tarucha, A fault-tolerant addressable [106] Y.C. Ma, M.H. Yung, Transforming Bell’states inequalities into state classifiers
spin qubit in a natural silicon quantum dot, 2016, arXiv:1602.07833. with machine learning, 2017, arXiv:1705.00813.
[76] R. Van Meter, T.D. Ladd, A.G. Fowler, Y. Yamamoto, Distributed quantum [107] G.J. Mendoza, R. Santagati, J. Munns, E. Hemsley, M. Piekarek, E. Martin-
computation architecture using semiconductor nanophotonics, Int. J. Quan- Lopez, G.D. Marshall, D. Bonneau, M.G. Thompson, J.L. O’Brien, Active tem-
tum Inf. 8 (2010) 295–323. poral multiplexing of photons, 2015, arXiv:1503.01215.
[77] M. Veldhorst, J.C.C. Hwang, C.H. Yang, A.W. Leenstra, B. de Ronde, J.P. De- [108] J.L. O’Brien, G.J. Pryde, A.G. White, T.C. Ralph, D. Branning, Demonstration of
hollain, J.T. Muhonen, F.E. Hudson, K.M. Itoh, A. Morello, A.S. Dzurak, An an all optical quantum controlled-NOT gate, Nature 426 (2003) 264.
addressable quantum dot qubit with fault-tolerant control fidelity, Nature [109] J.L. O’Brien, Optical quantum computing, Science 318 (5856) (2007) 1567–
Nanotechnol. 9 (2014) 981. 1570, 12.
[78] B. Vermersch, P.O. Guimond, H. Pichler, P. Zoller, Quantum state transfer via [110] J.L. O’Brien, A. Furusawa, J. Vuckovic, Photonic quantum technologies, Nature
noisy photonic and phononic waveguides, 2016, arXiv:1611.10240. Photon. 3 (12) (2009) 687–695, 12.
68 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

[111] A. Politi, M.J. Cryan, J.G. Rarity, S. Yu, J.L. O’Brien, Silica-on-silicon waveguide [145] J.J. Pla, et al., High-fidelity readout and control of a nuclear spin qubit in
quantum circuits, Science 320 (5876) (2008) 646–649, 05. silicon, Nature 496 (7445) (2013) 334–338, 04.
[112] S. Prawer, A.D. Greentree, Diamond for quantum computing, Science 320 [146] S.R. Schofield, N.J. Curson, M.Y. Simmons, F.J. Rueß, T. Hallam, L. Oberbeck,
(5883) (2008) 1601–1602, 06. R.G. Clark, Atomically precise placement of single dopants in si, Phys. Rev.
[113] G.J. Pryde, J.L. O’Brien, A.G. White, S.D. Bartlett, T.C. Ralph, Measuring a Lett. 91 (13) (2003) 136104–, 09.
photonic qubit without destroying it, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 190402. [147] S.M. Albrecht, A.P. Higginbotham, M. Madsen, F. Kuemmeth, T.S. Jespersen,
[114] M. Gimeno-Segovia, P. Shadbolt, D.E. Browne, T. Rudolph, From three- J. Nygard, P. Krogstrup, C.M. Marcus, Exponential protection of zero modes
photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states to ballistic universal quantum in Majorana islands, Nature 531 (2016) 206–209.
computation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2) (2015) 020502–, 07. [148] A. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann. Phys. 303
[115] P. Sibson, et al., Chip-based quantum key distribution, 2015, arxiv:1509. (2003) 2.
00768. [149] S. Dogra, G. Thomas, S. Ghosh, D. Suter, Superposing pure quantum states
[116] J.W. Silverstone, et al., On-chip quantum interference between silicon with partial prior information, 2017, arXiv:1702.02418.
photon-pair sources, Nature Photon. 8 (2) (2014) 104–108, 02. [150] X.M. Hu, et al., Experimental creation of superposition of unknown photonic
[117] J.W. Silverstone, R. Santagati, D. Bonneau, M.J. Strain, M. Sorel, J.L. O’Brien, quantum states, Phys. Rev. A 94 (2016) 033844.
M.G. Thompson, Qubit entanglement between ring-resonator photon-pair [151] K. Li, et al., Experimentally superposing two pure states with partial prior
sources on a silicon chip, Nature Commun. 6 (2015) 08. knowledge, Phys. Rev. A 95 (2017) 022334.
[118] N. Somaschiet al, Near-optimal single-photon sources in the solid state, [152] M. Oszmaniec, A. Grudka, M. Horodecki, A. Wojcik, Creating a superposition
Nature Photon. 10 (5) (2016) 340–345, 05. of unknown quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 110403.
[119] G. Duclos-Cianci, D. Poulin, Fast decoders for topological quantum codes, [153] S. Sami, I. Chakrabarty, A note on superposition of two unknown states using
Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 050504. Deutsch CTC model, Modern Phys. Lett. A 31 (2016) 1650170.
[120] G. Duclos-Cianci, D. Poulin, Fault-tolerant renormalization group decoded [154] D.W. Berry, H.M. Wiseman, Optimal states and almost optimal adaptive
for abelian topological codes, Quant. Inf. Comp. 14 (2014) 0721. measurements for quantum interferometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 5098–
[121] S.J. Devitt, A.G. Fowler, A.M. Stephens, A.D. Greentree, L.C.L. Hollenberg, 5101.
W.J. Munro, K. Nemoto, Architectural design for a topological cluster state [155] A. Bisio, G.M. DAriano, P. Perinotti, M. Sedlak, Quantum learning algorithms
quantum computer, New. J. Phys. 11 (2009) 083032. for quantum measurements, Phys. Lett. A 375 (39) (2011) 3425–3434.
[122] M.H. Freedman, A. Kitaev, M.J. Larsen, Z. Wang, Topological quantum com- [156] H.J. Briegel, D.E. Browne, W. Dur, R. Raussendorf, M. Van den Nest,
putation, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 40 (01) (2002) 31–39. Measurement-based quantum computation, Nat. Phys. (2009) 19–26.
[123] M.H. Freedman, A. Kitaev, M.J. Larsen, Z. Wang, Topological quantum com- [157] S. Gammelmark, K.M. lmer, Quantum learning by measurement and feed-
putation, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 40 (2003) 31–38. back, New J. Phys. 11 (3) (2009) 033017.
[124] K. Fujii, Quantum Computation with Topological Codes. From Qubits to [158] W.Y. Hwang, et al., Entangled quantum clocks for measuring proper-time
Topological Fault-Tolerance, CitySpringer-Verlag, Berlin, New York, 2015. difference, Eur. Phys. J. D 19 (1) (2002) 129–132.
[159] Y.S. Kim, et al., Protecting entanglement from decoherence using weak
[125] S. Lloyd, S. Garnerone, P. Zanardi, Quantum algorithms for topological and
measurement and quantum measurement reversal, Nat. Phys. 8 (2012) 117.
geometric analysis of data, Nature Commun. 7 (2016) arXiv:1408.3106.
[160] E. Knill, G. Ortiz, R.D. Somma, Optimal quantum measurements of expecta-
[126] C. Nayak, S.H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, S. Das Sarma, Non-abelian
tion values of observables, Phys. Rev. A 75 (1) (2007) 012328.
anyons and topological quantum computation, Rev. Modern Phys. 80 (3)
[161] U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, L. Lamata, P. Escandell-Montero, J.D. Martin-Guerrero,
(2008) 1083–1159, 09.
E. Solano, Quantum machine learning without measurements, 2016, arXiv:
[127] A. Paler, S.J. Devitt, K. Nemoto, I. Polian, Cross-level validation of topological
1612:05535.
quantum circuits, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 8507 (2014) 189–200.
[162] B.C. Sanders, G.J. Milburn, Optimal quantum measurements for phase esti-
[128] A. Paler, S.J. Devitt, K. Nemoto, I. Polian, Mapping of topological quantum
mation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 2944–2947.
circuits to physical hardware, Sci. Rep. 4 (2014).
[163] M. Sedlak, M. Ziman, Optimal single-shot strategies for discrimination of
[129] A. Paler, S.J. Devitt, A.G. Fowler, Synthesis of arbitrary quantum circuits to
quantum measurements, Phys. Rev. A 90 (2014) 052312.
topological assembly, 2016, arxiv:1604.08621.
[164] H.M. Wiseman, G.J. Milburn, Quantum Measurement and Control, Cam-
[130] S.D. Sarma, M. Freedman, C. Nayak, Majorana zero modes and topological
bridge University Press, 2010, ISBN: 9780521804424.
quantum computation, Npj Quantum Inf. 1 (2015) 15001.
[165] A.P. Lund, M.J. Bremner, T.C. Ralph. Quantum sampling problems, bosonsam-
[131] M.V. Altaisky, et al., Towards a feasible implementation of quantum neural
pling and quantum supremacy, Npj Quantum Inf. 3 (1) (2017) 15.
networks using quantum dots, Appl. Phys. Lett. 108 (2016) 103108.
[166] U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, et al., Advanced-retarded differential equations in
[132] E.C. Behrman, J. Niemel, J.E. Steck, S.R. Skinner, A quantum dot neural quantum photonic systems, Sci. Rep. 7 (2017) 42933.
network, in: Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Physics of Computation, [167] S. Mavadia, V. Frey, J. Sastrawan, S. Dona, M.J. Biercuk, Prediction and
Boston, 1996, pp. 22–24. real-time compensation of qubit decoherence via machine learning, Nature
[133] J. Claudon, J. Bleuse, N.S. Malik, M. Bazin, P. Jaffrennou, N. Gregersen, C. Commun. 8 (2017) 14106.
Sauvan, P. Lalanne, J.M. Gerard, A highly efficient single-photon source based [168] A. Perdomo-Ortiz, B. O’Gorman, J. Fluegemann, R. Biswas, V.N. Smelyanskiy,
on a quantum dot in a photonic nanowire, Nature Photon. 4 (3) (2010) 174– Determination and correction of persistent biases in quantum annealers, Sci.
177, 03. Rep. 6 (2016) 18628.
[134] N. Cody Jones, R. Van Meter, A.G. Fowler, P.L. McMahon, J. Kim, T.D. Ladd, Y. [169] S. Slussarenko, M.M. Weston, J.G. Li, N. Campbell, H.M. Wiseman, G.J.
Yamamoto, A layered architecture for quantum computing using quantum Pryde, Quantum state discrimination using the minimum average number
dots, Phys. Rev. X 2 (2012) 031007. of copies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 030502.
[135] D. Loss, D.P. DiVincenzo, Quantum computation with quantum dots, Phys. [170] S. Nagayama, T. Satoh, R. Van Meter, State injection lattice surgery and
Rev. A 57 (1998) 120. dense packing of the deformation-based surface code, Phys. Rev. A 95 (2017)
[136] M.D. Reed, et al., Reduced sensitivity to charge noise in semiconductor spin 012321.
qubits via symmetric operation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 110402. [171] J. O’Gorman, N.H. Nickerson, P. Ross, J.J.L. Morton, S.C. Benjamin, A silicon-
[137] M. Veldhorst, C.H. Yang, J.C.C. Hwang, W. Huang, J.P. Dehollain, J.T. Muhonen, based surface code quantum computer, Npj Quantum Inf. 2 (2016) 16014.
S. Simmons, A. Laucht, F.E. Hudson, K.M. Itoh, A. Morello, A.S. Dzurak, A two [172] S. Boixo, et al., Characterizing quantum supremacy in near-term devices,
qubit logic gate in silicon, Nature 526 (2015) 410–414. 2016, arXiv:1608.00263.
[138] F.A. Zwanenburg, A.S. Dzurak, A. Morello, M.Y. Simmons, L.C.L. Hollenberg, [173] M.P.V. Stenberg, O. Kohn, F.K. Wilhelm, Characterization of decohering
G. Klimeck, S. Rogge, S.N. Coppersmith, M.A. Eriksson, Silicon quantum quantum systems: Machine learning approach, Phys. Rev. A 93 (2016)
electronics, Rev. Modern Phys. 85 (2013) 961–1019. 012122.
[139] J.P. Dehollain, et al., Bell’states inequality violation with spins in silicon, Nat. [174] J. Romero, J. Olson, A. Aspuru-Guzik, Quantum autoencoders for efficient
Nano 11 (3) (2016) 242–246, 03. compression of quantum data, 2016, arXiv:1612.02806.
[140] A.S. Dzurak, et al., Charge-based silicon quantum computer architectures [175] C.H. Bennett, G. Brassard, Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution
using controlled single-ion implantation, 2003, arXiv:cond-mat/0306265. and coin tossing, in: Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computers,
[141] C.D. Hill, E. Peretz, S.J. Hile, M.G. House, M. Fuechsle, S. Rogge, M.Y. Simmons, Systems and Signal Processing, IEEE, 1984, pp. 175–179.
L.C.L. Hollenberg, A surface code quantum computer in silicon, Sci. Adv. 1 (9) [176] A.K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on Bell’states theorem, Phys. Rev.
(2015). Lett. 67 (6) (1991) 661–663.
[142] L.C.L. Hollenberg, A.D. Greentree, A.G. Fowler, C.J. Wellard, Two-dimensional [177] Z. Hradil, Quantum-state estimation, Phys. Rev. A 55 (1997) R1561–R1564.
architectures for donor-based quantum computing, Phys. Rev. B. 74 (2006) [178] D.W. Berry, H.M. Wiseman, J.K. Breslin, Optimal input states and feedback
045311. for interferometric phase estimation, Phys. Rev. A 63 (2001) 053804.
[143] B.E. Kane, A silicon-based nuclear spin quantum computer, Nature 393 [179] J. Fiurasek, Zdenek Hradil, Maximum-likelihood estimation of quantum
(1998) 133. processes, Phys. Rev. A 63 (2001) 020101.
[144] J.J. Pla, et al., A single-atom electron spin qubit in silicon, Nature 489 (7417) [180] G. Brassard, et al., Quantum amplitude amplification and estimation, Con-
(2012) 541–545, 09. temp. Math. 305 (2002) 53–74.
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 69

[181] H.P. Breuer, F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems, Oxford [215] L. Robledo, L. Childress, H. Bernien, B. Hensen, P.F.A. Alkemade, R. Hanson,
University Press, 2002. High-fidelity projective read-out of a solid-state spin quantum register,
[182] S. Machnes, U. Sander, S.J. Glaser, P. de Fouquieres, A. Gruslys, S. Schirmer, T. Nature 477 (7366) (2011) 574–578, 09.
Schulte-Herbruggen. Comparing, optimizing and benchmarking quantum- [216] E. Togan, Y. Chu, A.S. Trifonov, L. Jiang, J. Maze, L. Childress, M.V.G. Dutt,
control algorithms in a unifying programming framework, Phys. Rev. A 84 A.S. Sorensen, P.R. Hemmer, A.S. Zibrov, M.D. Lukin, Quantum entanglement
(2011) 022305. between an optical photon and a solid-state spin qubit, Nature 466 (7307)
[183] A. Sergeevich, S.D. Bartlett, Optimizing qubit Hamiltonian parameter esti- (2010) 730–734, 08.
mation algorithm using PSO, in: 2012 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Com- [217] F. Yan, et al., The flux qubit revisited to enhance coherence and reproducibil-
putation, IEEE, 2012. ity, Nature Commun. 7 (2016) 12964.
[184] K. Fujii, T. Morimae, Quantum commuting circuits and complexity of ising [218] G.H. Low, I.L. Chuang, Hamiltonian simulation by qubitization, 2016, arXiv:
partition functions, 2013, arXiv:1311.2128. 1610.06546.
[185] R. Raussendorf, J. Harrington, K. Goyal, A fault-tolerant one way quantum [219] S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, P. Rebentrost, Quantum principal component analysis,
computer, Ann. Phys. 321 (2006) 2242. Nat. Phys. 10 (2014) 631.
[186] A.G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J.M. Martinis, A.N. Cleland, Surface codes: To-
[220] V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nature
wards practical large-scale quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A. 86 (2012)
Photon. 5 (4) (2011) 222–229.
032324.
[221] Z. Zhao, J.K. Fitzsimons, J.F. Fitzsimons, Quantum assisted Gaussian process
[187] S. Arunachalam, et al., On the robustness of bucket brigade quantum RAM,
regression, 2015, arXiv:1512.03929.
New J. Phys. 17 (12) (2015) 123010.
[188] M. Jarzyna, R. Demkowicz-Dobrzanski, True precision limits in quantum [222] A.W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for linear systems
metrology, New J. Phys. 17 (1) (2015) 013010. of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 (15) (2009) 150502.
[189] E. Zahedinejad, J. Ghosh, B.C. Sanders, High-fidelity single-shot to oli gate via [223] G. Wang, New quantum algorithm for linear regression, 2014, arXiv:1402.
quantum control, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 200502. 0660.
[190] S.C. Benjamin, S. Bose, Quantum computing with an always-on Heisenberg [224] R. Raussendorf, H.J. Briegel, A one-way quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Lett.
interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 247901. 86 (2001) 5188–5191.
[191] A. Heuer, R. Menzel, P.W. Milonni, Induced coherence vacuum fields [225] H. Buhrman, H. Rohrig, Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, in:
and complementarity in biphoton generation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) Distributed Quantum Computing, Springer-Verlag, 2003, pp. 1–20.
053601. [226] A. Broadbent, A. Tapp, Can quantum mechanics help distributed comput-
[192] Y. Shi, Both Toffoli and controlled-not need little help to do universal quan- ing? SIGACT News 39 (3) (2008) 67–76.
tum computation, 2002, arXiv:quant-ph/0205115. [227] R. Van Meter, Architecture of a quantum multicomputer optimized for
[193] F. Verstraete, M.M. Wolf, J.I. Cirac, Quantum computation and quantum-state shor’states factoring algorithm, 2006, arXiv:quant-ph/0607065.
engineering driven by dissipation, Nat. Phys. 5 (2009) 633. [228] S.J. Devitt, A.M. Stephens, W.J. Munro, K. Nemoto, Requirements for fault-
[194] G.B. Lemos, V. Borish, G.D. Cole, S. Ramelow, R. Lapkiewicz, A. Zeilinger, tolerant factoring on an atom-optics quantum computer, Nature Commun.
Quantum imaging with undetected photons, Nature 512 (2014) 409. 4 (2013) 2524.
[195] U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, M. Sanz, L. Lamata, E. Solano, Biomimetic cloning of [229] R. Van Meter, C. Horsman, A blueprint for building a quantum computer,
quantum observables, Sci. Rep. 4 (2014) 4910. Commun. ACM 53 (10) (2013) 84–93.
[196] O.M. Shir, J. Roslund, Z. Leghtas, H. Rabitz, Quantum control experiments as [230] IBM, A new way of thinking: The IBM quantum experience, 2017, URL:
a testbed for evolutionary multi-objective algorithms, Genetic Prog. Evolv. http://www.research.ibm.com/quantum.
Mach. 13 (4) (2012) 445–491.
[231] X. Ma, S. Zotter, J. Kofler, T. Jennewein, A. Zeilinger, Experimental generation
[197] M. Tiersch, E.J. Ganahl, H.J. Briegel, Adaptive quantum computation in chang-
of single photons via active multiplexing, Phys. Rev. A 83 (4) (2011) 043814–
ing environments using projective simulation, Sci. Rep. 5 (2015) 12874.
04.
[198] Z. Li, J.R. Kermode, A. De Vita, Molecular dynamics with on-the-fly machine
[232] K. Nemoto, M. Trupke, S.J. Devitt, A.M. Stephens, K. Buczak, T. Nobauer,
learning of quantum-mechanical forces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 096405.
M.S. Everitt, J. Schmiedmayer, W.J. Munro, Photonic architecture for scalable
[199] D.W. Berry, A.M. Childs, R. Kothari, Hamiltonian simulation with nearly op-
quantum information processing in nv-diamond, 2013, arXiv:1309.4277.
timal dependence on all parameters, in: 2015 IEEE 56th Annual Symposium
on Foundations of Computer Science, 2015, pp. 792–809. [233] A.D. Greentree, Nanodiamonds in fabry–perot cavities: a route to scalable
[200] S. Aaronson, Read the fine print, Nat. Phys. 11 (4) (2015) 291–293. quantum computing, New J. Phys. 18 (2) (2016) 021002.
[201] S.J. Devitt, Classical control of large-scale quantum computers. RC2014, Lect. [234] C. Horsman, A.G. Fowler, S. Devitt, R. Van Meter, Surface code quantum
Notes Comput. Sci. 8507 (26–39) (2014). computing by lattice surgery, New J. Phys. 14 (2012) 123011.
[202] H. Neven, V.S. Denchev, G. Rose, W.G. Macready, Training a large scale [235] A.G. Fowler, S.J. Devitt, A bridge to lower overhead quantum computation,
classifier with the quantum adiabatic algorithm, 2009, arXiv:0912.0779. 2012, arXiv:1209.0510.
[203] H. Neven, V.S. Denchev, G. Rose, W.G. Macready, Training a binary classifier [236] J. Chen, L. Wang, E. Charbon, B. Wang, Programmable architecture for quan-
with the quantum adiabatic algorithm, 2008, arXiv:0811.0416. tum computing, Phys. Rev. A. 88 (2013) 022311.
[204] H. Neven, V.S. Denchev, G. Rose, W.G. Macready, Qboost: Large scale clas- [237] Y. Li, P.C. Humphreys, G.J. Mendoza, S.C. Benjamin, Resource costs for fault-
sifier training with adiabatic quantum optimization, in: Proceedings of the tolerant linear optical quantum computing, Phys. Rev. X 5 (2015) 041007.
Asian Conference on Machine Learning, in: Proceedings of Machine Learn- [238] K.M. Svore, A.V. Aho, A.W. Cross, I.L. Chuang, I.L. Markov, A layered software
ing Research, PMLR, vol. 25, Singapore Management University, Singapore, architecture for quantum computing design tools, IEEE Comput. 39 (1)
2012, pp. 333–348. (2006) 74–83.
[205] A. Paler, I. Polian, K. Nemoto, S.J. Devitt, A compiler for fault-tolerant high [239] D. Maslov, G.W. Dueck, D.M. Miller, C. Negrevergne, Quantum circuit sim-
level quantum circuits, 2015, arxiv:1509.02004. plification and level compaction, IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr.
[206] E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, A quantum approximate optimization Circuits Syst. 27 (3) (2008) 436–444.
algorithm, 2014, arXiv:1411.4028. [240] S.J. Gay, Quantum programming languages, Math. Struct. Comput. Sci. 16
[207] E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, A quantum approximate optimization (04) (2006) 581–600.
algorithm applied to a bounded occurrence constraint problem, 2014, arXiv: [241] A.S. Green, P.L. Lumsdaine, N.J. Ross, P. Selinger, B. Valiron, Quipper: a
1412.6062. scalable quantum programming language, ACM SIGPLAN Not. 48 (6) (2013)
[208] E. Farhi, A.W. Harrow, Quantum supremacy through the quantum approxi- 333–342.
mate optimization algorithm, 2016, arxiv:1602.07674.
[242] D. Wecker, K.M. Svore, LIQUi: A software design architecture and domain-
[209] Y.B. Sheng, L. Zhou, Distributed secure quantum machine learning, Sci. Bull.
specific language for quantum computing, 2014, arXiv:1402.4467.
62 (2017) 1025–2019.
[243] V. Gheorghiu, Quantum++ - A C++11 quantum computing library, 2014,
[210] K.H. Wan, et al., Quantum generalisation of feedforward neural networks,
arXiv:1412.4704.
2016, arXiv:1612.01045.
[211] H. Bernien, et al., Heralded entanglement between solid-state qubits sepa- [244] Y.L. Lim, S.D. Barrett, A.Beige, P. Kok, L.C. Kwek, Repeat-until-success quan-
rated by three metres, Nature 497 (7447) (2013) 86–90, 05. tum computing using stationary and flying qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (3)
[212] F. Dolde, I. Jakobi, B. Naydenov, N. Zhao, S. Pezzagna, C. Trautmann, J. Meijer, (2005) 30505.
P. Neumann, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, Room-temperature entanglement [245] D.K.L. Oi, S.J. Devitt, L.C.L. Hollenberg, Scalable error correction in distributed
between single defect spins in diamond, Nat. Phys. 9 (3) (2013) 139–143, ion trap computers, Phys. Rev. A 74 (2006) 052313.
03. [246] L. Jiang, J.M. Taylor, A.S. Sorensen, M.D. Lukin, Distributed quantum compu-
[213] B. Hensen, et al., Loophole-free bell inequality violation using electron spins tation based on small quantum registers, Phys. Rev. A 76 (2007) 062323.
separated by 1.3 kilometres, Nature 526 (7575) (2015) 682–686, 10. [247] J. Kim, C. Kim, Integrated optical approach to trapped ion quantum compu-
[214] P. Neumann, J. Beck, M. Steiner, F. Rempp, H. Fedder, P.R. Hemmer, J. tation, Quantum Inf. Comput. 9 (2) (2009).
Wrachtrup, F. Jelezko, Single-shot readout of a single nuclear spin, Science [248] L.M. Duan, C. Monroe, Colloquium: Quantum networks with trapped ions,
329 (5991) (2010) 542–544, 07. Rev. Modern Phys. 82 (2010) 1209–1224.
70 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71

[249] B.P. Lanyon, J.D. Whitfield, G.G. Gillet, M.E. Goggin, M.P. Almeida, I. Kas- [284] A.N. Chowdhury, R.D. Somma, Quantum algorithms for Gibbs sampling and
sal, J.D. Biamonte, M. Mohseni, B.J. Powell, M. Barbieri, A. Aspuru-Guzik, hitting-time estimation, 2016, arXiv:1603.02940.
A.G.White, Towards quantum chemistry on a quantum computer, Nature [285] R. Sweke, M. Sanz, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione, E. Solano, Digital quantum
Chem. 2 (2) (2010) 106–111. simulation of many-body non-Markovian dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 94 (2016)
[250] M.W. Johnson, et al., Quantum annealing with manufactured spins, Nature 022317.
473 (7346) (2011) 194–198. [286] E. Crosson, A.W. Harrow, Simulated quantum annealing can be exponentially
[251] A.G. Fowler, Time optimal quantum computation, 2012, arxiv:1210.4626. faster than classical simulated annealing, in: Foundations of Computer Sci-
[252] D. Wecker, et al., Gate-count estimates for performing quantum chemistry ence, FOCS, 2016 IEEE 57th Annual Symposium on, IEEE, 2016, pp. 714–723.
on small quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 90 (2) (2014) 022305–, 08. [287] K. Fujii, et al., Impossibility of classically simulating one-clean-qubit compu-
[253] A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M. Yung, X. Zhou, P. Love, A. Aspuru- tation, 2014, arXiv:1409.6777.
Guzik, J. O’Brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum [288] I.L. Markov, Limits on fundamental limits to computation, Nature 512 (7513)
processor, Nat. Commun. 5 (2014) 4213. (2014) 147–154.
[254] E. Bilgin, S. Boixo, Preparing thermal states of quantum systems by dimen- [289] C.H. Chien, R. Van Meter, S.Y. Kuo, Fault-tolerant operations for universal
sion reduction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (17) (2010) 17040. blind quantum computation, 2013, arXiv:1306.3664.
[255] M. Schwarz, K. Temme, F. Verstraete, Preparing projected entangled pair [290] N.C. Jones, J.D. Whitfield, P.L. McMahon, M.H. Yung, R. Van Meter, A. Aspuru-
states on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (11) (2012) 110502. Guzik, Y. Yamamoto, Simulating chemistry efficiently on fault-tolerant
[256] L. Bacsardi, On the way to quantum-based satellite communication, IEEE quantum computers, New J. Phys. 14 (2012) 115023.
Commun. Mag. 51 (08) (2013) 50–55. [291] K. Temme, et al., Quantum metropolis sampling, Nature 471 (7336) (2011)
[257] D. Petz, Quantum Information Theory and Quantum Statistics, Hiv: 6, 87–90.
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2008. [292] N. Wiebe, D. Braun, S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for data fitting, Phys. Rev.
[258] L. Gyongyosi, S. Imre, H.V. Nguyen, A survey on quantum channel capacities, Lett. 109 (2012) 050505.
IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 20 (2) (2018) 1149–1205, http://dx.doi.org/10. [293] D. Riste, M.P. da Silva, C.A. Ryan, A.W. Cross, A.D. Corcoles, J.A. Smolin, J.M.
1109/COMST.2017.2786748. Gambetta, J.M. Chow, B.R. Johnson, Demonstration of quantum advantage in
[259] L. Gyongyosi, S. Imre, Entanglement-gradient routing for quantum net- machine learning, Npj Quantum Inf. 3 (1) (2017) 16.
works, Sci. Rep. Nature (2017) http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017- [294] A. Kerenidis, A. Prakash, Quantum recommendation systems, in: Innovations
14394-w. in Theoretical Computer Science, ITCS’17, 2017.
[260] L. Gyongyosi, S. Imre, Entanglement availability differentiation service for [295] M. Benedetti, J. Realpe-Gomez, A. Perdomo-Ortiz, Quantum-assisted
the quantum internet, Sci. Rep. Nature (2018) http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ Helmholtz machines: A quantum–classical deep learning framework for
s41598-018-28801-3. industrial datasets in near-term devices, 2017, arXiv:1708.09784.
[261] L. Gyongyosi, S. Imre, S, Multilayer optimization for the quantum internet, [296] G. Torlai, R.G. Melko, Learning thermodynamics with Boltzmann machines,
Sci. Rep. Nature (2018). Phys. Rev. B 94 (2016) 165134, arXiv:1606.02718.
[262] L. Gyongyosi, S. Imre, S, Decentralized base-graph routing for the quantum [297] M. Benedetti, et al., Estimation of effective temperatures in quantum an-
internet, Phys. Rev. A (2018). nealers for sampling applications: A case study with possible applications
[263] S. Lloyd, The universe as quantum computer, in: H. Zenil (Ed.), A Computable
in deep learning, Phys. Rev. A 94 (2) (2016) 022308.
Universe: Understanding and exploring Nature as computation, World Sci-
[298] M.H. Amin, et al., Quantum Boltzmann machine, 2016, arXiv:1601.02036.
entific, Singapore, 2013, arXiv:1312.4455v1.
[299] J. Dulny, M. Kim, Developing quantum annealer driven data discovery, 2016,
[264] S. Lloyd, Capacity of the noisy quantum channel, Phys. Rev. A 55 (1997)
arXiv:1603.07980.
1613–1622.
[300] V. Dunjko, J.M. Taylor, H.J. Briegel, Quantum-enhanced machine learning,
[265] S. Muralidharan, J. Kim, N. Lutkenhaus, M.D. Lukin, L. Jiang. L., Ultrafast
Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 130501.
and fault-tolerant quantum communication across long distances, Phys. Rev.
[301] P.B. Wigley, et al., Fast machine-learning online optimization of ultra-cold-
Lett. 112 (2014) 250501.
atom experiments, Sci. Rep. 6 (2016) 25890.
[266] S. Pirandola, Capacities of repeater-assisted quantum communications,
[302] S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, P.k. Rebentrost, Quantum algorithms for supervised
2016, arXiv:1601.00966.
and unsupervised machine learning, 2013, arXiv:1307.0411.
[267] S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, L. Banchi, Fundamental limits of
[303] J.R. McClean, et al., The theory of variational hybrid quantum–classical
repeaterless quantum communications, Nature Commun. (2017) 15043,
algorithms, New J. Phys. 18 (2016) 023023.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15043.
[304] M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione, Prediction by linear regression on a
[268] S. Pirandola, S.L. Braunstein, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, T.P.W. Cope, G.
quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 94 (2) (2016) 022342.
Spedalieri, L. Banchi, Theory of channel simulation and bounds for private
[305] U.L. Heras, U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, E. Solano, M. Sanz, Genetic algorithms for
communication, Quantum Sci. Technol. 3 (2018) 035009.
digital quantum simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 230504.
[269] S. Lloyd, J.H. Shapiro, F.N.C. Wong, P. Kumar, S.M. Shahriar, H.P. Yuen,
Infrastructure for the quantum internet, ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. [306] P. Rebentrost, M. Mohseni, S. Lloyd, Quantum support vector machine for big
Rev. 34 (2004) 9–20. data classification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (13) (2014) 130503.
[270] H.J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature 453 (2008) 1023–1030. [307] P.T. Trung, R. Van Meter, C. Horsman, Optimising the Solovay-Kitaev algo-
[271] J. Romero, et al., Strategies for quantum computing molecular energies using rithm, Phys. Rev. A. 87 (2012) 052332.
the unitary coupled cluster ansatz, 2017, arXiv:1701.02691. [308] A.P. Young, S. Knysh, V.N. Smelyanskiy, Size dependence of the minimum
[272] G.G. Guerreschi, M. Smelyanskiy, Practical optimization for hybrid excitation gap in the quantum adiabatic algorithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (17)
quantum–classical algorithms, 2017, arXiv:1701.01450. (2008) 170503.
[273] I. Kerenidis, A. Prakash, Quantum gradient descent for linear systems and [309] B.W. Reichardt, The quantum adiabatic optimization algorithm and local
least squares, 2017, arXiv:1704.04992. minima, in: Proceedings of the thirty-sixth annual ACM symposium on
[274] P. Rebentrost, M. Schuld, L. Wossnig, F. Petruccione, S. Lloyd, Quantum Theory of Computing, ACM, 2004, pp. 502–510.
gradient descent and newton’states method for constrained polynomial [310] D. Poulin, P. Wocjan, Sampling from the thermal quantum gibbs state and
optimization, 2016, arXiv:1612.01789. evaluating partition functions with a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103
[275] M.X. Luo, H.R. Li, H. Lai, X. Wang, Unified quantum no-go theorems and (22) (2009) 220502.
transforming of quantum states in a restricted set, 2017, arXiv:1701.04166. [311] A. Young, S. Knysh, V. Smelyanskiy, First-order phase transition in the
[276] L. Zhao, C.A. Perez-Delgado, J.F. Fitzsimons, Fast graph operations in quan- quantum adiabatic algorithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2) (2010) 020502.
tum computation, Phys. Rev. A 93 (2016) 032314. [312] H. Krovi, M. Ozols, J. Roland, Adiabatic condition and the quantum hitting
[277] M. Krenn, M. Malik, R. Fickler, R. Lapkiewicz, A. Zeilinger, Automated search time of Markov chains, Phys. Rev. A 82 (2) (2010) 022333.
for new quantum experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 090405. [313] V. Dunjko, H.J. Briegel, Sequential quantum mixing for slowly evolving
[278] A. Montanaro, Quantum algorithms: an overview, Npj Quantum Inf. 2 (2016) sequences of Markov chains, 2015, arXiv:1503.01334.
15023. [314] M.H. Yung, A. Aspuru-Guzik, A quantum-quantum metropolis algorithm,
[279] U. Alvarez-Rodriguez, M. Sanz, L. Lamata, E. Solano, E, Artificial life in Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109 (3) (2012) 754–759.
quantum technologies, Sci. Rep. 6 (2016) 20956. [315] E. Farhi, et al., A quantum adiabatic evolution algorithm applied to random
[280] P. Rebentrost, A. Steffens, S. Lloyd, Quantum singular value decomposition instances of an NP-complete problem, Science 292 (5516) (2001) 472–475.
of non-sparse low-rank matrices, 2016, arXiv:1607.05404. [316] E. Farhi, et al., Performance of the quantum adiabatic algorithm on random
[281] N. Wiebe, C. Granade, Efficient Bayesian phase estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. instances of two optimization problems on regular hypergraphs, Phys. Rev.
117 (2016) 010503. A 86 (5) (2012) 052334.
[282] N. Wiebe, A. Kapoor, K.M. Svore, Quantum perceptron models, 2016, arXiv: [317] H. Neven, V.S. Denchev, M. Drew-Brook, J. Zhang, W.G. Macready, G. Rose,
1602.04799. Nips 2009 demonstration: Binary classification using hardware implemen-
[283] M.J. Bremner, A. Montanaro, D.J. Shepherd, Average-case complexity versus tation of quantum annealing, in: NIPS 2009 demonstration, 2009.
approximate simulation of commuting quantum computations, Phys. Rev. [318] V.S. Denchev, N. Ding, S.V.N. Vishwanathan, H. Neven, Robust classification
Lett. 117 (2016) 080501, arXiv:1504.07999. with adiabatic quantum optimization, 2012, arXiv:1205.1148.
 L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre / Computer Science Review 31 (2019) 51–71 71

[319] L.M.K. Vandersypen, et al., Experimental realization of shor’states quantum [350] Z. Bar-Yossef, T.S. Jayram, I. Kerenidis, Exponential separation of quantum
factoring algorithm using nuclear magnetic resonance, Nature 414 (2001) and classical one-way communication complexity, SIAM J. Comput. 38 (1)
883–887. (2008) 366–384.
[320] S. Gulde, et al., Implementation of the Deutsch-Jozsa algorithm on an ion- [351] D. Brunner, M.C. Soriano, C.R. Mirasso, I. Fischer, Parallel photonic infor-
trap quantum computer, Nature 421 (2003) 48–50. mation processing at gigabyte per second data rates using transient states,
[321] R. Schutzhold, Pattern recognition on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 67 Nature Commun. 4 (2013) 1364.
(2003) 062311. [352] G.H. Low, T.J. Yoder, I.L. Chuang, Quantum inference on Bayesian networks,
[322] S. Curtarolo, D. Morgan, K. Persson, J. Rodgers, G. Ceder, Predicting crystal Phys. Rev. A 89 (2014) 062315.
structures with data mining of quantum calculations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 [353] G. Carleo, M. Troyer, Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial
(2003) 135503. neural networks, Science 355 (6325) (2017) 602–606.
[323] H.A. Rabitz, M.M. Hsieh, C.M. Rosenthal, Quantum optimally controlled [354] K.H. Wan, O. Dahlsten, H. Kristjansson, R. Gardner, M.S. Kim, Quantum
transition landscapes, Science 303 (5666) (2004) 1998–2001. generalisation of feedforward neural networks, Npj Quantum Inf. 3 (2017)
[324] C.F. Chiang, P. Wocjan, Quantum algorithm for preparing thermal Gibbs 36.
states-detailed analysis, in: NATO Science for Peace and Security Series - D: [355] R.A. Servedio, S.J. Gortler, Equivalences and separations between quantum
Information and Communication Security, vol. 26, 2010, pp. 138–147. and classical learnability, SIAM J. Comput. 33 (5) (2004) 1067–1092.
[325] S. Arunachalam, R. de Wolf, A survey of quantum learning theory, 2017, [356] W. Van Dam, S. Hallgren, L. Ip, Quantum algorithms for some hidden shift
arXiv:1701.06806. problems, SIAM J. Comput. 36 (3) (2006) 763–778.
[326] V. Dunjko, H.J. Briegel, Machine learning & artificial intelligence in the [357] D. Aharonov, V. Jones, Z. Landau, A polynomial quantum algorithm for
quantum domain, 2017, arXiv:1709.02779. approximating the Jones polynomial, in: Proceedings of the Thirty-eighth
[327] A. Wichert, Principles of Quantum Artificial Intelligence, World Scientific, Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’06, New York, NY,
Hackensack New Jersey, ISBN: 978-9814566742, 2014. USA, 2006, pp. 427–436.
[328] C. Zhang, An improved lower bound on query complexity for quantum PAC [358] R. Somma, et al., Quantum simulations of classical annealing processes, Phys.
learning, Inform. Process. Lett. 111 (1) (2010) 40–45. Rev. Lett. 101 (13) (2008) 130504.
[329] K.L. Pudenz, D.A. Lidar, Quantum adiabatic machine learning, Quantum Inf. [359] A.M. Childs, R.Cleve, S.P. Jordan, D.L. Yonge-Mallo, Discrete-query quantum
Process. 12 (5) (2013) 2027–2070, ISSN: 1573-1332. algorithm for NAND trees, Theory Comput. 5 (1) (2009) 119–123.
[330] R. Kothari, An optimal quantum algorithm for the oracle identification [360] P. Wocjan, et al., Quantum algorithm for approximating partition functions,
problem, 2013, CoRR, arXiv:abs/13117685. Phys. Rev. A 80 (2) (2009) 022340.
[331] N. Wiebe, A. Kapoor, K.M. Svore, Quantum deep learning, 2014, arXiv:1412. [361] B. Zhan, S. Kimmel, A. Hassidim, Super-polynomial quantum speed-ups for
3489. boolean evaluation trees with hidden structure, in: Innovations in Theoret-
[332] M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione, An introduction to quantum machine ical Computer Science, Cambridge MA, USA, January 8–10, 2012, 2012, pp.
learning, Contemp. Phys. 1–14 (2014). 249–265.
[333] C. Chen, D. Dong, H.X. Li, J. Chu, T.J. Tarn, Fidelity-based probabilistic q- [362] B.D. Clader, B.C. Jacobs, C.R. Sprouse, Preconditioned quantum linear system
learning for control of quantum systems, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. algorithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (25) (2013) 250504.
Syst. 25 (5) (2014) 920–933. [363] A.M. Childs, R. Kothari, R.D. Somma, Quantum linear systems algorithm with
[334] V. Mnih, et al., Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning, exponentially improved dependence on precision, 2015, arXiv:1511.02306.
Nature 518 (2015) 529–533. [364] V. Dunjko, H.J. Briegel, Quantum mixing of Markov chains for special distri-
[335] Z. Li, X. Liu, N. Xu, J. Du, Experimental realization of a quantum support vector butions, New J. Phys. 17 (7) (2015) 073004.
machine, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 140504. [365] L. Wossnig, Z. Zhao, A. Prakash, A quantum linear system algorithm for dense
[336] X.D. Cai, D. Wu, Z.E. Su, M.C. Chen, X.L. Wang, L. Li, N.L. Liu, C.Y. Lu, J.W. Pan, matrices, 2017, arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.06174.
Entanglement-based machine learning on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. [366] P. Palittapongarnpim, P. Wittek, E. Zahedinejad, B.C. Sanders, Learning in
Lett. 114 (2015) 110504. quantum control: High-dimensional global optimization for noisy quantum
[337] J. Adcock, et al., Advances in quantum machine learning, 2015, dynamics, 2016, arXiv:1607.03428.
arXiv:1512.02900. [367] R. Cleve, et al., How to share a quantum secret, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (3) (1999)
[338] A.W. Cross, G. Smith, J.A. Smolin, Quantum learning robust against noise, 648–651.
Phys. Rev. A 92 (1) (2015) 012327. [368] M. Ben-Or, A. Hassidim, Fast quantum byzantine agreement, in: Proceedings
[339] L. Banchi, N. Pancotti, S. Bose, Quantum gate learning in qubit networks: of the Thirty-Seventh Annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing,
Toffoli gate without time-dependent control, Npj Quantum Inf. 2 (2016) ACM, 2005, pp. 481–485.
16019 EP – 07. [369] F. De Martini, V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, E. Nagali, L. Sansoni, F.
[340] N. Wiebe, et al., Quantum inspired training for Boltzmann Machines, 2015, Sciarrino, Experimental quantum private queries with linear optics, Phys.
arXiv:1507.02642. Rev. A 80 (2009) 010302.
[341] M. Kieferova, N. Wiebe, Tomography and generative data modeling via [370] T. Rudolph, L. Grover, Quantum communication complexity of establishing
quantum Boltzmann training, 2016, arXiv:1612.05204. a shared reference frame, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 217905.
[342] V. Dumoulin, et al., On the challenges of physical implementations of RBMs, [371] S.D. Bartlett, et al., Reference frames, superselection rules and quantum
in: Twenty-Eighth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2014. information, Rev. Modern Phys. 79 (2007) 555–609.
[343] E. Zahedinejad, S. Schirmer, B.C. Sanders, Evolutionary algorithms for hard [372] T. Islam, L. Magnin, B. Sorg, S. Wehner, Spatial reference frame agreement in
quantum control, Phys. Rev. A 90 (2014) 032310. quantum networks, New J. Phys. 16 (6) (2014) 063040.
[344] C.H. Yu, F. Gao, Q.L. Wang, Q.Y. Wen, Quantum algorithm for association rules [373] R. Jozsa, D.S. Abrams, J.P. Dowling, C.P. Williams, Quantum clock synchro-
mining, Phys. Rev. A 94 (2016) 042311. nization based on shared prior entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (9) (2000)
[345] D. Steiger, M. Troyer, Racing in parallel: Quantum versus classical, in: 2010–2013.
Quantum Machine Learning Workshop, Perimeter Institute for theoretical [374] I.L. Chuang, Quantum algorithm for distributed clock synchronization, Phys.
Physics, Waterloo, 2016. Rev. Lett. 85 (9) (2000) 2006–2009.
[346] C. Ciliberto, M. Herbster, A.D. Ialongo, M. Pontil, A. Rocchetto, S. Severini, L. [375] V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, Quantum-enhanced positioning and
Wossnig, Quantum machine learning: a classical perspective, 2017, arXiv: clock synchronization, Nature 412 (6845) (2001) 417–419.
1707.08561v2. [376] A. Hentschel, B.C. Sanders, Efficient algorithm for optimizing adaptive quan-
[347] Y. Levine, D. Yakira, N. Cohen, A. Shashua, Deep learning and quantum en- tum metrology processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 233601.
tanglement: Fundamental connections with implications to network design, [377] N.B. Lovett, C. Crosnier, M. Perarnau-Llobet, B.C. Sanders, Differential evo-
2017, arXiv:1704.01552. lution for many-particle adaptive quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110
[348] A. Perdomo-Ortiz, M. Benedetti, J. Realpe-Gomez, R. Biswas, Opportunities (2013) 220501.
and challenges for quantum- assisted machine learning in near-term quan- [378] S. Lloyd, C. Weedbrook, Quantum generative adversarial learning, Phys. Rev.
tum computers, arXiv:1708.09757. Lett. 121 (2018) arXiv:1804.09139.
[349] S. Lu, S. Huang, K. Li, J. Li, J. Chen, D. Lu, Z. Ji, Y. Shen, D. Zhou, B. Zeng, [379] E. Farhi, H. Neven, Classification with quantum neural networks on near
A separability-entanglement classifier via machine learning, 2017, arXiv: term processors, 2018, arXiv:1802.06002v1.
1705.01523.