Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2008 ii Paper 4 22F i Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-24
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 ii Paper 2 33C Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-24
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2012 iii Paper 67 4 c Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
Let . In terms of the Pauli X gate, the given unitary operator is , with and . Since and ,Thus the normalized eigenvectors are , with eigenvalues and respectively. At they coincide as eigenvalues, and the whole two-dimensional Hilbert space is the eigenspace; the same chosen eigenbasis remains valid.
Prepare independently of and use the exact quantum phase estimation circuit of the preceding parts on the controlled- black box. It returns exactly usingThe chosen eigenstate contains all the unknown phase information, unlike , whose eigenvalue is independent of .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 58 2 iii Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
Under the usual reversible-circuit interpretation, there is a genuine obstruction to uniform probability lowering by a unitary in the printed premise. The universal assertion cannot hold for arbitrary : it fails already at the search density .
An explicit counterexample uses , one good basis state , and . The six pure statesall have good probability . Their equally weighted density operator is , a maximally mixed state. Every unitary operator leaves this mixture unchanged, so its average output good probability remains . The printed assertion would instead make all six output probabilities , a contradiction. More generally, averaging states uniformly over good and bad basis vectors and two opposite phases gives , proving the same obstruction at the actual search density .
The intended conditional construction needs only a supplied reversible preparation that lowers the success probability of the particular starting state, not of every state. Here is the complete argument under that weaker resource assumption. Count and as supplied, query-free operations, as required for the claimed input-oracle bound. Let and chooseIf equality holds, use the original preparation. Otherwise use the stipulated preparation on to obtain with good probability . Its reflection operator is implementable byThe good and bad components may be nonuniform, but amplitude amplification applies to this same two-dimensional decomposition. After iterations of , its good probability isThus the stated exact-query conclusion follows from accessible preparation of one known-overlap state and its inverse. If the supplied preparation uses oracle queries, those costs cannot be omitted.
A physically realizable known-state success dilution for exact amplitude amplification is available in the standard enlarged marking-oracle model. Append a flag in , where , and call a joint state good only when and the flag is one. This prepared state's success probability is exactly . Reflect about this known product preparation and mark the joint good subspace; ordinary iterations then succeed with certainty. A supplied controlled phase oracle gives one marking query per iteration, or a Boolean bit oracle computes , applies the joint phase and uncomputes in two queries. Measuring the data therefore returns a good with certainty in queries. This changes the state space and marking test, and does not assert the impossible universal -qubit circuit. Controlled access is an additional resource in a bare phase-oracle model, so it is made explicit rather than silently assumed.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 58 3 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
This is the Deutsch-Jozsa test with an arbitrary uniform-state unitary, and does not require to be a power of two. Choose a known unitary operator such that . Prepare the target qubit in . One Boolean-oracle call gives quantum phase kickback:Apply to the index register. The amplitude on isIt equals or for the two constant strings, and equals zero for a balanced string. Consequently a single query decides the promised problem exactly: measure the index register and report constant for outcome zero, balanced for any other outcome. This is the Deutsch-Jozsa algorithm with the available exact state-preparation operation.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 58 4 a i Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
For , the Pauli X gate and Pauli Z gate act on different qubits in , so they commute. Their product is a Hermitian matrix and squares to the identity operator. Its eigenvalues have modulus one; equivalently it is a unitary operator. Therefore its spectral norm isThe qualification is necessary because the qubit labelled one does not exist for .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 58 4 b i Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
For a unitary operator , . Thus for every nonnegative integer ,Insert this into the convergent matrix exponential series in the finite-dimensional qubit setting:Consequently unitary conjugation commutes with the exponential:For an unbounded self-adjoint Hamiltonian, the same identity follows from the spectral theorem for normal operators, with the domain transported by ; no unbounded power-series manipulation is needed.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2014 iii Paper 61 1 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
Use the positive-sign quantum Fourier transformOrthogonality of the finite-group characters makes a unitary operator. Here is the least positive period. The injectivity within one period implies : write , . Periodicity gives , and injectivity forces . Put .
Start with two available computational basis states . Apply to the first register and query the modular-addition quantum oracle:Measure the second register. For some , the first register becomes the normalized coset stateThe quantum Fourier transform of a periodic coset state isIndeed, the inner geometric sum vanishes unless the Fourier label is a multiple of . Measuring that label gives for a uniformly random . Compute, by the Euclidean algorithm,Thus exact period recovery from a Fourier sample succeeds whenever is coprime to , andHere is the Euler totient function. The classical number-theory input is the totient lower bound from the Mertens product: for sufficiently large , for an absolute , with the finitely many small cases handled separately. For recovery is certain; for its probability is . The useful asymptotic probability statement is a lower bound, hence notation; it can be much larger for particular periods, for example a prime period.
There is one oracle query, two Fourier transforms and two measurements. The final greatest common divisor and division use polynomial time in . This meets the specified primitive-operation model without assuming that an arbitrary- Fourier gate is free in another gate model. If a constant success probability is wanted, repeat independently times and return the least common multiple of the candidates: each candidate divides , and one successful sample makes that least common multiple exactly .