This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
COLLEGE
ECE DEPT.
PRESENTED BY –
* PARTHA PAUL
* SUBHAJIT MONDAL
* SUDIPAN SINGHA
OUTLINE
History
Motivation
Quantum vs. Classical
Quantum Gates
Quantum Circuits
Physical Implementation
HISTORY
Abacus
Gear Driven
Integrated Circuits
Over 200 million transistors
computational LIMITS
Some important computational problems
seem to be permanently intractable
> Their complexity grows exponentially with
problem size, e.g. factoring large
numbers—the basis for ―unbreakable‖
Internet codes
Performance improvements in ―classical‖
computer circuits may be approaching a
limit > This is described by Moore’s Law
Moore’s Law
In 1965 Gordon Moore predicted that
number of transistors per square inch
on integrated circuits had doubled
every year since the integrated circuit
was invented. Moore predicted that
this trend would continue for the
foreseeable future.
This has held true …….. So far
* In 1965  Gordon Moore announced that his prediction
would not remain true for much longer because of modern
technology.
The ability to put transistors on chips was approaching the
atomic level.
* In 1982  Feynman proposed the idea of creating machines
based on the laws of quantum mechanics instead of the laws
of classical physics.
* In 1994  Peter Shor came up with a quantum algorithm to
factor very large numbers in polynomial time.
* In 1997  Lov Grover develops a quantum search algorithm
with O(√N) complexity
Quantum Computer
A quantum computer is a machine that
performs calculations based on the laws of
quantum mechanics, which is the behavior
of particles at the subatomic level.
Two States Are Better Than One
!!
• Digital Computers rely on O’s and 1’s
• Voltage produces high and lows
• Can only have one state at a time
• Quantum computers can have multiple states
• Two places at once
A single qubit can be forced into
a superposition of the two
states denoted by the addition
of the state vectors:
¢> = o 1 0> + o 2 1>
Where o1 and o2 are complex
numbers and o1^2 +o2^2 = 1
Representation of Data 
Superposition
Light pulse of
frequency ì for
time interval t/2
State 0>
State 0> + 1>
Quantum Information
Quantum Gates :
Quantum Gates
X
X
X
N0T MATRIX
Quantum Gates  Hadamard :
Simplest gate involves one qubit and is called a Hadamard Gate (also
known as a squareroot of NOT gate.) Used to put qubits into superposition.
H H
State
I0>
State
I0>+I1>
State
I1>
Note: Two Hadamard gates used in succession can be used as a NOT
gate
Quantum Gates  Controlled NOT
A gate which operates on two qubits is called a ControlledNOT (CN) Gate. If
the bit on the control line is 1, invert the bit on the target line.
A  Target
B  Control
A’
B’
A B
A’ B’
0 0
0 1
1 0
1 1
1 1
0 0
1 0
0 1
Note: The CN gate has a similar
behavior to the XOR gate with some
extra information to make it reversible.
Quantum Logic Circuits
A beam splitter
Half of the photons leaving the light source arrive at detector A;
the other half arrive at detector B.
A beamsplitter
0
1
0
1
% 50
% 50
• Equal path lengths, rigid mirrors.
• Only one photon in the apparatus at a time.
• All photons leaving the source arrive at B.
• WHY?
Quantum Circuits
A quantum (combinational) circuit is a sequence of
quantum gates, linked by ―wires‖
The circuit has fixed ―width‖ corresponding to the
number of qubits being processed
Logic design (classical and quantum) attempts to
find circuit structures for needed operations that
are
Functionally correct
Independent of physical technology
Lowcost, e.g., use the minimum number of qubits or
gates
Quantum logic design is not well developed!
Ad hoc designs known for many specific functions and
gates
Example 1 illustrating a theorem by [Barenco et al.
1995]: Any C
2
(U) gate can be built from CNOTs, C(V),
and C(V
†
) gates, where V
2
= U
V V
†
V
=
U
(1+i) (1i)
(1i) (1+i)
(1i) (1+i)
(1+i) (1i)
1/2
1/2
Example 1: Simulation
0)
1)
x)
0)
1)
x)
0)
1)
x)
V V
†
V
=
U
0)
1)
Vx)
0)
1)
0)
1)
x)
0)
1)
0)
1)
x)
?
• Implementing a Half Adder
– Problem: Implement the classical functions sum = x
1
© x
0
and carry = x
1
x
0
• Generic design:
x
1
)
U
add
x
0
)
y
1
)
y
0
)
x
1
)
x
0
)
y
1
)
© carry
y
0
) © sum























.

\

=
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
ADD
U
• Half Adder
:
Generic
design (contd.)
Physical Implementation
Main Contenders
• Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)
• Ion traps
• Semiconductor quantum dots
• Optical lattices etc.
Main Deficiency
• Poor scalability
Chris Monroe,
University of
Michigan
Ion traps
Summary: State of the Art
• Quantum circuits can solve some important problems with
exponentially fewer operations than classical algorithms
• Small quantum circuits have been demonstrated in the
lab using various physical technologies
• Quantum cryptography has been demonstrated over long
distances
• Current technologies are fragile, and appear to be limited
to tens of qubits and hundreds of gates
• Big gaps remain in our understanding of quantum circuit
and algorithm design, as well as the necessary
implementation techniques