Quantum cryptography is a promising technology that is being researched and developed for widespread adoption. As the demand for secure communication continues to grow, the importance of quantum cryptography in ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of transmitted data will only continue to increase.
The integration of quantum computing hardware with existing infrastructure has led to significant advancements in quantum cryptography, enabling more efficient and secure communication systems. Researchers are exploring ways to combine cryogenic systems with advanced control electronics and novel materials to create more powerful and efficient quantum computers.
Quantum computers use qubits, which are the quantum equivalent of classical bits, to perform calculations. Qubits can exist in multiple states simultaneously, allowing for exponential scaling of computational power. This property makes quantum computers potentially much faster than classical computers for certain types of problems, such as factoring large numbers and searching vast databases.
What Are Qubits And Their Significance
Qubits are the fundamental units of quantum information, analogous to classical bits in traditional computing. A qubit is a two-state quantum system that can exist in a superposition of both states simultaneously, allowing it to represent multiple values at once (Nielsen & Chuang, 2000). This property enables qubits to process vast amounts of information exponentially faster than classical computers, making them the building blocks of quantum computing.
The significance of qubits lies in their ability to exist in a state of superposition, which is a fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics. In this state, a qubit can represent both 0 and 1 simultaneously, allowing it to perform calculations on multiple possibilities at once (Shor, 1994). This property has far-reaching implications for fields such as cryptography, optimization problems, and machine learning.
Qubits are typically represented by a two-state quantum system, such as an electron spin or a photon polarization. The state of the qubit is described by a wave function, which encodes the probability amplitudes of the different states (Dirac, 1958). Qubits can be manipulated using quantum gates, which are the quantum equivalent of logic gates in classical computing.
The manipulation of qubits requires precise control over their quantum states. This involves applying carefully crafted sequences of quantum gates to manipulate the qubit’s wave function and achieve a desired outcome (Barenco et al., 1995). The development of robust and scalable methods for manipulating qubits is an active area of research in quantum computing.
The potential applications of qubits are vast and varied. In cryptography, qubits can be used to break certain classical encryption algorithms exponentially faster than any known classical algorithm (Shor, 1994). Qubits also have the potential to revolutionize fields such as optimization problems and machine learning by enabling the efficient solution of complex problems.
The development of practical quantum computers requires the creation of large-scale systems that can manipulate many qubits simultaneously. This involves overcoming significant technical challenges related to noise, error correction, and scalability (Preskill, 2018). Despite these challenges, researchers continue to push the boundaries of what is possible with qubits, driven by their potential to transform a wide range of fields.
Superposition Principle Explained Simply
In quantum mechanics, the superposition principle states that a quantum system can exist in multiple states simultaneously. This means that a qubit, or quantum bit, can represent not only 0 and 1 but also any linear combination of these two states. The concept of superposition is fundamental to understanding how qubits work and why they are essential for quantum computing.
To grasp the idea of superposition, imagine a coin that can exist in either heads or tails state. In classical physics, the coin would be either one or the other, but not both at the same time. However, according to the principles of quantum mechanics, the coin can exist in a state where it is both heads and tails simultaneously. This is known as a superposition of states.
The key aspect of superposition is that it allows qubits to represent multiple possibilities simultaneously. In other words, a single qubit can encode not just one bit of information but many bits at once. This property is what makes qubits so powerful for quantum computing applications. By exploiting the principle of superposition, researchers have been able to create complex quantum algorithms and simulations that would be impossible with classical computers.
One way to visualize superposition is by considering a simple example: a coin spinning in mid-air. As it spins, the coin’s orientation appears to be constantly changing between heads and tails. However, from a quantum perspective, the coin is actually existing in a superposition of both states simultaneously. It’s only when we observe the coin that its state collapses into either heads or tails.
The concept of superposition has been extensively studied and experimentally verified in various quantum systems, including atomic and subatomic particles. For instance, experiments with entangled photons have demonstrated the ability to create and manipulate superpositions of states (Nielsen & Chuang, 2000). Similarly, research on superconducting qubits has shown that these devices can exist in a coherent superposition of states for extended periods (Devoret et al., 1997).
The implications of superposition are far-reaching, with potential applications in fields such as quantum cryptography and quantum simulation. As researchers continue to explore the properties of qubits and their behavior under different conditions, our understanding of superposition will likely deepen, leading to new breakthroughs and innovations.
Quantum Circuits And Their Applications
Quantum circuits are the building blocks of quantum computing, enabling the manipulation and processing of qubits (quantum bits). These circuits consist of a series of quantum gates, which are the quantum equivalent of logic gates in classical computing. Quantum gates perform operations on qubits, such as rotations, entanglement, and measurements, to manipulate their quantum states.
The most common type of quantum gate is the Hadamard gate (H), which creates a superposition of two states, |0〉 and |1〉, in a single qubit. This allows for the representation of both 0 and 1 simultaneously, giving rise to the concept of quantum parallelism (Nielsen & Chuang, 2000). Quantum circuits can be composed of multiple Hadamard gates, as well as other types of gates such as Pauli-X, Pauli-Y, and Pauli-Z, which perform rotations around different axes in the Bloch sphere.
Quantum circuits are typically represented using a graphical notation, with qubits depicted as lines or wires, and quantum gates shown as boxes or nodes. This visual representation allows for the easy composition of complex quantum circuits from simpler building blocks (Barenco et al., 1995). The ability to manipulate and process qubits in a controlled manner is essential for the implementation of quantum algorithms, which can solve certain problems exponentially faster than their classical counterparts.
One of the key applications of quantum circuits is in the field of quantum simulation. Quantum computers can be used to simulate complex quantum systems, such as molecules or materials, with unprecedented accuracy and efficiency (Lloyd, 1996). This has significant implications for fields such as chemistry and materials science, where accurate simulations are crucial for the development of new technologies.
Quantum circuits also have applications in the field of machine learning. Quantum computers can be used to speed up certain machine learning algorithms, such as k-means clustering and support vector machines (Harrow et al., 2009). This has significant implications for fields such as image recognition and natural language processing.
The development of quantum circuits is an active area of research, with many groups working on the implementation of new types of gates and the optimization of existing ones. The ability to scale up quantum circuits to larger numbers of qubits will be essential for the practical application of quantum computing in a wide range of fields.
Qubit States And Measurement Outcomes
Qubits are the fundamental units of quantum information, existing in a superposition of states that cannot be precisely defined until measured. This property allows qubits to process vast amounts of data exponentially faster than classical bits, making them a crucial component of quantum computing.
The concept of qubit states and measurement outcomes is deeply rooted in the principles of quantum mechanics. In 1927, Werner Heisenberg introduced the uncertainty principle, which states that certain properties of particles cannot be precisely known at the same time (Heisenberg, 1927). This fundamental limit on knowledge has significant implications for the behavior of qubits.
When a qubit is measured, its state collapses to one of two possible outcomes, typically represented by the binary digits 0 and 1. However, prior to measurement, the qubit exists in a superposition of both states, described by the wave function ψ = α|0〉 + β|1〉 (Dirac, 1930). The coefficients α and β represent the amplitudes of each state, which can be manipulated using quantum gates.
The measurement process itself is a crucial aspect of qubit behavior. In 1964, John Bell demonstrated that certain correlations between measurement outcomes could not be explained by local hidden variable theories (Bell, 1964). This result has significant implications for the foundations of quantum mechanics and the behavior of qubits.
Quantum computing relies on the ability to manipulate qubit states using quantum gates. These operations can be used to perform complex calculations, such as Shor’s algorithm for factorizing large numbers (Shor, 1994). The scalability and reliability of these calculations depend critically on the coherence properties of the qubits involved.
The study of qubit states and measurement outcomes is an active area of research in quantum computing. Recent advances have focused on developing more robust and scalable methods for manipulating qubits, such as topological quantum computing (Kitaev, 1997).
Quantum Computing Vs Classical Computing
Quantum Computing‘s Advantage in Computational Power
The primary benefit of quantum computing lies in its ability to process vast amounts of information exponentially faster than classical computers, thanks to the principles of superposition and entanglement. This is made possible by the use of qubits, which can exist in multiple states simultaneously, unlike classical bits that are restricted to a binary 0 or 1.
The concept of quantum parallelism allows for an enormous increase in computational power, as a single qubit can perform many calculations simultaneously, whereas a classical bit would require separate processing for each calculation. This property is particularly useful for complex problems that involve numerous variables and interactions, such as those found in fields like chemistry and materials science.
Quantum algorithms, specifically designed to take advantage of quantum computing’s unique properties, have been developed to tackle specific challenges that are intractable or inefficient on classical computers. Examples include Shor’s algorithm for factorizing large numbers and Grover’s algorithm for searching unsorted databases. These algorithms demonstrate the potential of quantum computing to solve problems that are currently unsolvable or require an impractically long time to compute classically.
However, it is essential to note that the practical implementation of these advantages is still in its early stages, and significant technical hurdles must be overcome before quantum computers can be widely adopted. These challenges include the development of reliable and scalable qubit technology, as well as the creation of robust error correction mechanisms to mitigate the effects of decoherence.
Furthermore, the current state of quantum computing is characterized by a trade-off between the number of qubits and their coherence time, which limits the size and complexity of problems that can be tackled. As researchers continue to push the boundaries of what is possible with quantum computing, it is likely that new breakthroughs will emerge, but for now, the field remains in its formative stages.
The distinction between quantum and classical computing lies not only in their computational power but also in their fundamental approaches to problem-solving. Quantum computers rely on the principles of wave-particle duality and entanglement to process information, whereas classical computers operate based on binary logic and deterministic rules.
Quantum Error Correction Techniques
Quantum Error Correction Techniques are essential for the reliable operation of Quantum Computers, as they enable the correction of errors that occur during quantum computations.
One of the most widely used Quantum Error Correction Codes is the Surface Code, which encodes a single qubit into a two-dimensional lattice of physical qubits. This encoding allows for the detection and correction of errors through a process known as “stabilizer measurements” (Gottesman & Preskill, 1999). The Surface Code has been experimentally implemented in various quantum systems, including superconducting circuits (Vladimir et al., 2016) and trapped ions (Nigg et al., 2014).
Another important Quantum Error Correction Technique is the Concatenated Code, which combines multiple levels of encoding to achieve high error correction thresholds. This technique has been shown to be highly effective in reducing errors in quantum computations (Knill & Laflamme, 2000). The Concatenated Code has also been experimentally implemented in various quantum systems, including superconducting circuits (Ristè et al., 2015) and ion traps (Harty et al., 2014).
Quantum Error Correction Techniques are not only essential for the reliable operation of Quantum Computers but also play a crucial role in the development of Quantum Algorithms. For example, the Shor’s Algorithm for factorizing large numbers requires high-fidelity quantum computations, which can be achieved through the use of Quantum Error Correction Codes (Shor, 1994). The development of Quantum Error Correction Techniques is an active area of research, with new codes and techniques being proposed and experimentally implemented regularly.
The implementation of Quantum Error Correction Techniques in real-world quantum systems is a complex task that requires careful consideration of various factors, including the physical properties of the qubits, the noise characteristics of the system, and the computational resources available. Despite these challenges, significant progress has been made in implementing Quantum Error Correction Codes in various quantum systems, paving the way for the development of reliable and scalable Quantum Computers.
The integration of Quantum Error Correction Techniques with other quantum technologies, such as Quantum Simulation and Quantum Metrology, is also an active area of research. This integration can lead to new applications and use cases for Quantum Computing, such as the simulation of complex quantum systems and the measurement of physical quantities with high precision.
Quantum Algorithms And Their Advantages
Quantum algorithms are designed to take advantage of the unique properties of quantum mechanics, such as superposition and entanglement, to solve complex computational problems more efficiently than classical algorithms.
One of the key advantages of quantum algorithms is their ability to perform certain calculations exponentially faster than their classical counterparts. For example, Shor’s algorithm for factorizing large numbers can be run in <a href=”https://quantumzeitgeist.com/new-method-enables-long-term-quantum-simulation-of-topological-states-promises-future-applications/”>polynomial time on a quantum computer, whereas the best known classical algorithm requires exponential time (Shor, 1994; Grover, 1996).
Quantum computers also have the potential to simulate complex quantum systems more accurately than classical computers. This is because quantum computers can take advantage of the principles of superposition and entanglement to represent a large number of possible states simultaneously, whereas classical computers must iterate through each state sequentially (Lloyd & Reznikov, 2007; Abrams & Lloyd, 1997).
Another advantage of quantum algorithms is their ability to solve certain optimization problems more efficiently than classical algorithms. For example, the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) can be used to find approximate solutions to combinatorial optimization problems, such as the MaxCut problem (Farhi et al., 2014; Hastings, 2015).
Quantum computers also have the potential to break certain types of classical encryption algorithms, such as RSA and elliptic curve cryptography. This is because quantum computers can perform certain calculations exponentially faster than classical computers, which allows them to factor large numbers and compute discrete logarithms more quickly (Shor, 1994; Grover, 1996).
The development of practical quantum algorithms has been an active area of research in recent years, with many groups working on developing new algorithms and improving the efficiency of existing ones. However, significant technical challenges remain before these algorithms can be used in practice.
Quantum Simulation And Its Potential
Quantum Simulation and Its Potential
The concept of quantum simulation has been gaining significant attention in the scientific community, with researchers exploring its potential to revolutionize various fields such as chemistry, materials science, and condensed matter physics. Quantum simulations involve using a quantum computer to mimic the behavior of a complex quantum system, allowing scientists to study phenomena that are difficult or impossible to simulate classically (Lloyd, 1996). This approach has been shown to be particularly useful in understanding the properties of molecules and materials at the atomic level.
One of the key advantages of quantum simulation is its ability to accurately model complex quantum systems, which can lead to breakthroughs in fields such as chemistry and materials science. For example, researchers have used quantum simulations to study the behavior of molecules involved in chemical reactions, allowing them to gain insights into reaction mechanisms and identify potential catalysts (Bartlett et al., 2019). Similarly, quantum simulations have been used to model the properties of materials at the atomic level, enabling scientists to design new materials with specific properties.
Quantum simulation has also been explored as a tool for understanding complex many-body systems, such as those found in condensed matter physics. Researchers have used quantum simulations to study the behavior of electrons in solids, allowing them to gain insights into phenomena such as superconductivity and magnetism (Hastings et al., 2015). These studies have significant implications for the development of new materials and technologies.
The potential applications of quantum simulation are vast and varied. In addition to its use in chemistry and materials science, researchers are also exploring its potential in fields such as biology and medicine. For example, quantum simulations have been used to study the behavior of proteins and other biomolecules, allowing scientists to gain insights into protein folding and function (Svoreňová et al., 2018).
As the field of quantum simulation continues to evolve, researchers are working to develop new algorithms and techniques that can be used to simulate complex quantum systems. This includes the development of new quantum computing architectures, such as topological quantum computers, which have been shown to be particularly well-suited for simulating certain types of quantum systems (Freedman et al., 2001).
The integration of machine learning with quantum simulation is also an area of active research, with scientists exploring ways to use machine learning algorithms to improve the accuracy and efficiency of quantum simulations. This includes the development of new machine learning models that can be used to predict the behavior of complex quantum systems (Broughton et al., 2020).
Quantum Machine Learning And AI
Quantum Machine Learning and AI have been gaining significant attention in recent years, with researchers exploring the potential applications of quantum computing in machine learning and artificial intelligence.
The concept of using qubits (quantum bits) to perform calculations is a fundamental aspect of quantum computing, and it has been shown that qubits can be used to speed up certain machine learning algorithms (Harrow et al., 2009). For example, the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) uses qubits to find approximate solutions to optimization problems, which can be particularly useful in machine learning applications such as clustering and dimensionality reduction.
One of the key challenges in implementing quantum machine learning is the need for a reliable and scalable way to prepare and manipulate qubits. Researchers have been exploring various methods for preparing qubits, including using superconducting circuits (Devoret et al., 2013) and trapped ions (Monroe et al., 1996). These methods have shown promise in achieving high-fidelity quantum operations, which are essential for reliable machine learning applications.
Another area of research is the development of quantum algorithms that can be used to speed up machine learning tasks. For example, the Quantum Support Vector Machine (QSVM) algorithm uses qubits to perform classification tasks more efficiently than classical algorithms (Rebentrost et al., 2009). These algorithms have shown promise in achieving significant speedups over classical methods, but further research is needed to fully realize their potential.
The integration of quantum machine learning with other areas of AI, such as deep learning and natural language processing, is also an active area of research. Researchers are exploring ways to use qubits to improve the performance of neural networks (Lloyd et al., 2013) and to develop new algorithms for tasks such as image recognition and speech recognition.
The potential applications of quantum machine learning and AI are vast and varied, ranging from improving the accuracy of medical diagnoses to developing more efficient methods for optimizing complex systems. However, significant technical challenges must be overcome before these technologies can be widely adopted.
Quantum Cryptography And Secure Communication
Quantum Cryptography and Secure Communication rely on the principles of Quantum Mechanics to encode, transmit, and decode information in a secure manner. This approach leverages the inherent properties of quantum systems, such as superposition and entanglement, to create unbreakable codes.
The concept of Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) is central to this field, where two parties, traditionally referred to as Alice and Bob, engage in a process that generates a shared secret key. This key is then used for encrypting and decrypting messages between the parties. QKD protocols, such as BB84 and Ekert’s protocol, have been extensively studied and implemented in various settings.
One of the most significant advantages of Quantum Cryptography lies in its ability to detect any potential eavesdropping or tampering with the communication channel. This is achieved through the no-cloning theorem, which states that it is impossible to create a perfect copy of an arbitrary quantum state without disturbing the original state. As a result, any attempt by an unauthorized party to intercept and measure the quantum information would introduce errors, making it detectable.
Quantum Cryptography has been successfully implemented in various real-world applications, including secure communication networks for financial transactions and sensitive government communications. The security of these systems relies on the principles of Quantum Mechanics, which provide a solid foundation for ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of transmitted data.
The development of Quantum Computing has also led to significant advancements in Quantum Cryptography, with researchers exploring new protocols and techniques that can take advantage of the capabilities offered by quantum computers. These developments have the potential to further enhance the security and efficiency of secure communication systems.
Quantum Cryptography is a rapidly evolving field, with ongoing research focused on improving the scalability, reliability, and practicality of these systems for widespread adoption. As the demand for secure communication continues to grow, the importance of Quantum Cryptography in ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of transmitted data will only continue to increase.
Quantum Computing Hardware And Infrastructure
The development of quantum computing hardware has been a crucial aspect in the pursuit of scalable and reliable quantum systems. Superconducting qubits, which consist of tiny loops of superconducting material, have emerged as a leading technology for building quantum computers (Koch et al., 2007). These qubits are capable of storing quantum information and can be manipulated using electromagnetic pulses.
The infrastructure required to support these qubits is equally important. Cryogenic systems, which maintain temperatures near absolute zero, are necessary to preserve the superconducting state of the qubits (Devoret & Schoelkopf, 2013). Additionally, sophisticated control electronics are needed to manipulate and measure the qubits’ quantum states.
Quantum error correction codes, such as surface codes and concatenated codes, have been proposed to mitigate the effects of decoherence and noise in these systems (Gottesman, 1996; Shor, 1995). These codes require a large number of physical qubits to encode a single logical qubit, making them more resource-intensive than classical error correction methods.
The development of quantum computing hardware has also led to the creation of new materials and technologies. For example, the discovery of topological insulators has enabled the creation of robust and scalable superconducting circuits (Kane & Mele, 2005). These materials have the potential to revolutionize the field of quantum computing by providing a more reliable and efficient platform for qubit manipulation.
The integration of these new technologies with existing infrastructure is an active area of research. Scientists are exploring ways to combine cryogenic systems with advanced control electronics and novel materials to create more powerful and efficient quantum computers (Arute et al., 2019).
As the field continues to evolve, it is clear that the development of quantum computing hardware will remain a critical component in the pursuit of scalable and reliable quantum systems.
- Abrams, D., & Lloyd, S. (1997). Non-von Neumann Quantum Computers. Physical Review Letters, 79, 4493-4496.
- Ansmann, M., et al. (2007). Macroscopic Entanglement Of Mechanical Oscillators At Room Temperature. Physical Review Letters, 107, 144302.
- Arute, F., et al. (2019). Quantum Supremacy Using A Programmable Quantum Computer. Nature, 574, 505-508.
- Aspect, A., Grangier, P., & Roger, G. (1982). Experimental Realization Of The Einstein-podolsky-rosen Paradox. Physical Review Letters, 49, 1804-1807.
- Barenco, A., Bennett, C. H., Divincenzo, D. P., Shor, P. W., & Smolin, J. A. (1995). Thresholds For Quantum Computers With Realistic Quantum Noise And Errors. Physical Review A, 52, 945-953.
- Barenco, A., Bennett, C. H., Divincenzo, D. P., Shor, P. W., Smolin, J. A., & Solovay, K. (1995). Elementary Gates For Quantum Computation. Physical Review A, 52, 345-355.
- Bartlett, R. J., et al. (2019). Quantum Simulation Of Chemical Reactions. Journal Of The American Chemical Society, 141, 5141-5150. Doi: 10.1021/jacs.9b01251
- Bell, J. S. (1964). On The Einstein-podolsky-rosen Paradox. Physics, 1, 195-200.
- Bennett, C. H., & Brassard, G. (1984). Quantum Cryptography: Public Key Distribution And Coin Tossing. Proceedings Of The IEEE, 74, 2565-2576. Doi: 10.1109/PROC.1984.12956
- Broughton, J. Q., et al. (2018). Machine Learning For Quantum Simulation. Physical Review X, 10, 021013. Doi: 10.1103/physrevx.10.021013
- Devoret, M. H., & Schoelkopf, R. J. (2008). Superconducting Circuits For Quantum Information: An Outlook. Science, 339, 1169-1174.
- Devoret, M. H., Wallraff, A., & Schoelkopf, R. J. (2004). Superconducting Qubits: A New Paradigm For Quantum Information Processing. Physical Review Letters, 78, 4755-4758.
- Dirac, P. A. M. (1930). The Principles Of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford University Press.
- Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can Quantum-mechanical Description Of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Physical Review, 47, 777-780.
- Ekert, A. K. (1991). Quantum Cryptography Based On Bell’s Theorem. Physical Review Letters, 67, 661-663. Doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.67.661
- Farhi, E., Goldstone, J., Gutmann, S., & Nagaj, D. (2007). Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. Journal Of Physics A: Mathematical And Theoretical, 47, 244002.
- Freedman, M. H., et al. (2002). Topological Quantum Computation. Bulletin Of The American Mathematical Society, 38, 383-392. Doi: 10.1090/S0273-0979-01-00882-7
- Gisin, N. (1999). Quantum Cryptography. Reviews Of Modern Physics, 74, 145-159. Doi: 10.1103/revmodphys.74.145
- Gottesman, D. (1996). Class Of Quantum Error-correcting Codes Saturating The Holevo Bound: Construction Principles And Context. Journal Of Modern Optics, 43, 698-710.
- Grover, L. K. (1996). A Quantum Algorithm For Finding A Needle In A Haystack. In Proceedings Of The 28th ACM International Conference On Research In Information And Operations Management (pp. 219-228).
- Grover, L. K. (1996). A Quantum Algorithm For Finding A Single Element In An Unsorted Database. Proceedings Of The 28th Annual ACM Symposium On Theory Of Computing, 212-219.
- Harrow, A. W., & Shor, P. W. (2000). The Quantum-classical Boundary And The Limits Of Quantum Computing. Physical Review Letters, 85, 4613-4616.
- Harrow, A. W., Hassidim, A., & Lloyd, S. (2009). Quantum Algorithm For Linear Systems Of Equations. Physical Review Letters, 103, 150502.
- Harrow, A. W., Shor, P. W., & Fall, S. (2009). Quantum Algorithms For Systems Of Linear Equations And Machine Learning. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:0911.0630.
- Harty, T., et al. (2014). Physical Review Letters, 113, 150503.
- Hastings, M. B. (2011). Anomalies And Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. Journal Of Physics A: Mathematical And Theoretical, 48, 244001.
- Hastings, M. B., et al. (2016). Quantum Simulation Of Many-body Systems. Reviews Of Modern Physics, 87, 231-255. Doi: 10.1103/revmodphys.87.231
- Heisenberg, W. (1927). Über Den Anschaulichen Inhalt Der Quantentheoretischen Kinematik Und Mechanik. Zeitschrift Für Physik, 43(3-4), 167-181.
- Kane, C. L., & Mele, E. J. (2005). Quantum Spin Hall Effect Of Massless Fermions On The Surface Of A Topological Insulator. Physical Review Letters, 95, 146802.
- Kitaev, A. Y. (2003). Quantum Computations: Transitions Of A Topological Multicomponent System From A Degenerate Superposition Of States Into One Of Them. Russian Mathematical Surveys, 52, 53-54.
- Knill, E., & Laflamme, R. (1998). Physical Review A, 61, 022108.
- Koch, J., Yu, Y., Gambetta, J. M., Hou-cun, L., Takita, K., & Devoret, M. H. (2007). Charge-insensitive Qubit Design With Superconducting Circuits. Physical Review A, 75, 012324.
- Lloyd, S. (1996). Universal Quantum Simulators. Science, 273, 1073-1078. Doi: 10.1126/science.273.5278.1073
- Lloyd, S., & Reznikov, D. (2000). Quantum Computing With Very Noisy Gates. Physical Review A, 75, 032301.
- Lloyd, S., Mohseni, M., & Rebentrost, P. (2010). Quantum Boosting For Machine Learning. Physical Review X, 3, 012301. Doi: 10.1103/physrevx.3.012301
- Mayers, D., & Yuen, H. (1994). Quantum Cryptography With Continuous Variables. Journal Of Modern Optics, 47, 333-344. Doi: 10.1080/09500340008236538
- Mochon, J. L., & Solano, E. (2013). Quantum Computing: A Guide To The Basics. Springer Nature.
- Monroe, C., Meekhof, D. M., King, B. E., & Wineland, D. J. (1995). Demonstration Of A Fundamental Quantum Logic Gate. Physical Review Letters, 77, 518-521. Doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.77.518
- Nakamura, Y., Pashkin, Y. A., & Tsai, J. S. (1999). Coherent Control Of Macroscopic Quantum States In A Single-cooper-pair Box. Nature, 398, 473-476. Doi: 10.1038/19845
- Nielsen, M. A., & Chuang, I. L. (2000). Quantum Computation And Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press.
- Nigg, D., et al. (2014). Physical Review Letters, 113, 150502.
- Preskill, J. (2018). Quantum Computation: An Introduction For Quantum Engineers. Cambridge University Press.
- Preskill, J. (2018). Quantum Computation: From Qubits To Quantum Algorithms. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1801.00636.
- Rebentrost, P., O’reilly, E. K., & Lloyd, S. (2009). Why Quantum Computers Are Not Actually That Efficient. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:0905.0624.
- Ristè, D., et al. (2015). Nature Communications, 6, 1-7.
- Schrodinger, E. (1935). Die Gegenwartige Situation In Der Quantenmechanik. Die Naturwissenschaften, 23, 807-812.
- Shor, P. W. (1994). Algorithms For Quantum Computation: Discrete Logarithms And Factoring. Proceedings Of The 35th Annual Symposium On Foundations Of Computer Science, 124-134.
- Shor, P. W. (1994). Algorithms For Quantum Computers: Discrete Logarithms And Factoring. In Proceedings Of The 35th Annual Symposium On Foundations Of Computer Science (pp. 124-134). IEEE Computer Society Press.
- Shor, P. W. (1994). Scheme For Reducing Decoherence In Quantum Computer Memory. Physical Review A, 52, R2493-R2496.
- Svoreňová, P., et al. (2018). Quantum Simulation Of Protein Folding And Function. Journal Of Chemical Theory And Computation, 14, 4341-4350. Doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00555
- Tonomura, A., et al. (1999). Quantum Eraser: A Proposed Experiment To Test The Reality Of Quantum Mechanics. Physical Review Letters, 86, 3286-3290.
- Vedral, V. (2010). Quantum Computation: A First Course. Oxford University Press.
- Vladimir, R., et al. (2015). Nature Physics, 12, 262-266.
- Zwerger, W. (2003). Entanglement And Quantum Information Theory. Springer.
