Use the positive-exponent quantum Fourier transform convention . The period of a function here is the least positive translation leaving the function unchanged on the cyclic group . The injective promise means exactly when . In particular : the subgroup of period translations is generated by , and wrapping the argument by preserves its value. This is exact quantum period finding on a finite cyclic group, rather than the truncated, nondividing-period version requiring continued fractions.
Prepare a uniform superposition state in the first quantum register using , and perform a reversible computation of the function into a second quantum register, cleaning its workspace by uncomputation:
A quantum measurement in the computational basis of the second quantum register leaves a periodic coset state in the first:
For the quantum Fourier transform of this periodic coset state, the finite geometric series vanishes unless the measured label is . On those labels its normalized amplitude is . Thus has the uniform distribution on a finite set on , irrespective of .
Compute the greatest common divisor by the Euclidean algorithm, and set , with . Since ,
The exact period recovery from a Fourier sample is therefore certified by testing . Every candidate divides and lies between and , so the injective promise makes that equality equivalent to . This includes , where the test uses input , and , which always succeeds. The test does not assert that an arbitrary equality of function values certifies an arbitrary period; the Fourier-derived divisor restriction is essential.
The concise result is
Here is the Euler totient function, with . The totient lower bound from the Mertens product gives for . Each trial uses polynomial time quantum Fourier transforms, function evaluations and Euclidean algorithm arithmetic in . Repeating independent trials gives constant success probability; the herald accepts only correct answers.
The printed asymptotic bound has the wrong direction for this argument. In Big O notation, the stated upper bound on the number of coprime integers supplies no success lower bound and is itself false uniformly: for prime , , not . Likewise the single-trial success need not be , since it tends to one for prime. The meaningful corrected guarantee is the lower bound above. If an upper-bounded success rate is literally required, one may deliberately retain an accepted result with an independent probability proportional to ; this discards useful successes and is unnecessary for efficient recovery.
First require . A discrete logarithm to a generator of a group of exists only for nonzero ; the printed membership inadvertently also permits zero, for which is undefined. Zero can be rejected before any quantum circuit.
Put and write . Since is a generator of a group of order , the map is a bijection from to the multiplicative group of a finite field. Hence every nonzero has a unique with . Equality of powers of is equality of their exponents modulo , giving
The fiber over is an affine coset of the subgroup , and contains exactly pairs. This identifies the hidden subgroup problem underlying discrete-logarithm Fourier sampling; knowing numerically is not needed to construct the coset state.
Let be the unique discrete logarithm of the measured value , so that . The fiber calculation gives exactly the pairs with , where . The initial amplitude of each pair is , so the Born rule assigns probability to this outcome.
After projective measurement and normalization, the first two quantum registers are in the coset state
The measured third quantum register factors as and may be omitted. There is no loss of coherence between the terms in this post-measurement state: the quantum measurement reveals the common function value, not an individual input pair.
Apply the same positive-exponent quantum Fourier transform to each of the two quantum registers. The amplitude at of the coset state is
The finite geometric series is when and zero otherwise. Therefore
There are allowed pairs, with following the uniform distribution on a finite set. The factor changes the probability amplitudes by phases depending on the output label , but has no effect on their probabilities. Using an inverse rather than forward quantum Fourier transform on both quantum registers gives the same support relation.
A modular inverse of exists precisely when . In that case the discrete logarithm is
It cannot generally be determined from every allowed pair. Put . The supported linear congruence has solutions modulo , and determines only modulo ; gives no information when . For instance and are compatible with both and . One may verify a candidate by modular exponentiation, checking . Repeated discrete-logarithm Fourier sampling finds an invertible with per-trial probability , which has the same totient lower bound from the Mertens product as before. When , the group is trivial and are determined without Fourier samples.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.