Alexei Kitaev
References
- 1.D. Aharonov, A. Kitaev, and N. Nisan. Quantum circuits with mixed states. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual A CM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 20-30, 1998. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 2.F. Alizadeh. Interior point methods in semidefinite programming with applications to combinatorial optimization. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 5(1):13-51, 1995.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 3.L. Babai. Trading group theory for randomness. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual A CM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 421-429, 1985. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 4.L. Babai, L. Fortnow, and C. Lund. Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols. Computational Complexity, 1(1):3-40, 1991.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 5.A. Barenco. A universal two-bit gate for quantum computation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 449:679-683, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 6.A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. DiVincenzo, N. Margolus, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter. Elementary gates for quantum computation. Physical Review Letters A, 52:3457-3467, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 7.E. Bernstein and U. Vazirani. Quantum complexity theory. SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(5):1411-1473, 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 8.A. Berthiaume. Quantum computation. In L. Hemaspaandra and A. Selman, editors, Complexity Theory Retrospective II, pages 23-50. Springer, 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 9.J. Cai, A. Condon, and R. Lipton. On bounded round multi-prover interactive proof systems. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 45-54, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 10.D. Deutsch. Quantum theory, the Church-Turing principle and the universal quantum computer. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A400:97-117, 1985.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 11.D. Deutsch. Quantum computational networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A425:73-90, 1989.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 12.D. DiVincenzo. Two-bit gates are universal for quantum computation. Physical Review A, 50:1015-1022, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 13.U. Feige. On the success probability of two provers in one-round proof systems. In Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, pages 116-123, 1991.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 14.U. Feige and L. Lovfisz. Two-prover one-round proof systems: their power and their problems. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual A CM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 733-744, 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 15.C. Fuchs and J. van de Graaf. Cryptographic distinguishability measures for quantum-mechanical states. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 45(4):1216-1227, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 16.O. Goldreich. A taxonomy of proof systems. In L. Hemaspaandra and A. Selman, editors, Complexity Theory Retrospective II, pages 109-134. Springer- Verlag, 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 17.S. Goldwasser, S. Micali, and C. Rackoff. The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems. SIAM Journal on Computing, 18(1):186-208, 1989. Preliminary version appeared in Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual A CM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 291-304, 1985. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 18.S. Goldwasser and M. Sipser. Private coins versus public coins in interactive proof systems. In S. Micali, editor, Randomness and Computation, volume 5 of Advances in Computing Research, pages 73-90. JAI Press, 1989.Google Scholar
- 19.M. GrStschel, L. Lov~sz, and A. Schrijver. The ellipsoid method and its consequences in combinatorial optimization. Combinatorica, 1, 1981.Google Scholar
- 20.R. Horn and C. Johnson. Matrix Analysis. Cambridge University Press, 1985. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 21.L. Hughston, R. Jozsa, and W. Wootters. A complete classification of quantum ensembles having a given density matrix. Physics Letters A, 183:14-18, 1993.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 22.R. Jozsa. Fidelity for mixed quantum states. Journal of Modern Optics, 41(12):2315-2323, 1994.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 23.A. Kitaev. Quantum computations: algorithms and error correction. Russian Mathematical Surveys, 52(6):1191-1249, 1997.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 24.D. Lapidot and A. Shamir. Fully parallelized multi prover protocols for NEXP-time. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 13-18, 1991. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 25.C. Lund, L. Fortnow, H. Karloff, and N. Nisan. Algebraic methods for interactive proof systems. Journal of the A CM, 39(4):859-868, 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 26.A. Shamir. IP = PSPACE. Journal of the A CM, 39(4):869-877, 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 27.P. Shor. Fault-tolerant quantum computation. In Pro. ceedings of the 37th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 56-65, 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 28.P. Shor. Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(5):1484-1509, 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 29.L. Vandenberghe and S. Boyd. Semidefinite programruing. SIAM Review, 38(1):49-95, 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 30.J. Watrous. PSPACE has constant-round quantum interactive proof systems. In Proceedings of the dOth Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 112-119, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 31.A. Yao. Quantum circuit complexity. In Proceedings of the 3jth Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 352-361, 1993.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Parallelization, amplification, and exponential time simulation of quantum interactive proof systems
Comments