Exponential increase and global access to read/write memory states in quantum computing (QC) simulation limit both the number of qubits and quantum transformations which can be currently simulated. Although QC simulation is parallel by nature, spatial and temporal complexity are major performance hazards, making this a nontrivial application for high performance computing. A new methodology employing reduction and decomposition optimizations has shown relevant results, but its GPU implementation could be further improved. In this work, we develop a new kernel for in situ GPU simulation that better explores its resources without requiring further hardware. Shor’s and Grover’s algorithms are simulated up to 25 and 21 qubits respectively and compared to our previous version, to simulator and to ProjectQ framework, showing better results with relative speedups up to 4.38×, 3357.76× and 333× respectively.
AvilaAMaronAReiserR. (2014) GPU-aware distributed quantum simulation. In: Proceedings of the 29th annual ACM symposium on applied computing (SAC), SAC ‘14, Gyeongju, Korea, 24–28 March 2014, pp. 860–865. New York: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/2554850.2554892. ISBN 978-1-4503-2469-4.
2.
AvilaAReiserRPillaM (2016a) Quantum computing simulation through reduction and decomposition optimizations with a case study of Shor’s algorithm. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience29: 1–14. DOI: 10.1002/cpe.3961. ISBN 1532-0634.
3.
AvilaAReiserRYaminA. (2016b) Optimizing D-GM quantum computing by exploring parallel and distributed quantum simulations under GPUs arquitecture. In: Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC), Vancouver, Canada, 24–29 July 2016, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
4.
AvilaAReiserRYaminA. (2016c) Scalable quantum simulation by reductions and decompositions through the Id-operator. In: Proceedings of the 31st annual ACM symposium on applied computing (SAC), Pisa, Italy, 4–8 April, pp. 1255–1257. New York: ACM.
5.
AvilaAReiserRPillaM. (2017) Efficient in-situ quantum computing simulation of Shor’s and Grover’s algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 8th workshop on applications for multi-core architectures (WAMCA), Campinas, Brazil, 17–20 October, pp. 61–66. New York: IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/SBAC-PADW.2017.19.
6.
BeauregardS (2003) Circuit for Shor’s algorithm using 2n+3 qubits. Quantum Computing3(2): 175–185.
7.
BrassardGHøyerPTappA (1998) Quantum counting. In: LarsenKGSkyumSWinskelG (eds) Proceeding of the 25th international colloquium on automata, languages and programming (ICALP), Aalborg, Denmark, 13–17 July 1998, pp. 820–831. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI: 10.1007/BFb0055105.
8.
ButscherBWeimerH (2007) Libquantum—simulation of quantum mechanics. Available at: http://www.libquantum.de/ (accessed 1 September 2018).
9.
GroverL (1996) A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Philadelphia, USA, 22–24 May 1996, pp. 212–219.
10.
GutierrezERomeroSTrenasM. (2010) Quantum computer simulation using the CUDA programming model. Computer Physics Communications181: 283–300.
KhammassiNAshrafIFuX. (2017) Qx: a high-performance quantum computer simulation platform. In: Design, automation test in Europe conference exhibition (DATE), Lausanne, Switzerland, 27–31 March 2017, pp. 1–8. DOI: 10.23919/DATE.2017.7927034.
13.
LuTCJuangJC (2011) Quantum-inspired space search algorithm (QSSA) for global numerical optimization. Applied Mathematics and Computation218(6): 2516–2532.
14.
MaronAReiserRPillaM (2013) High-Performance Quantum Computing Simulation for the Quantum Geometric Machine Model. In: IEEE/ACM international symposium in cluster, cloud, and grid computing (CCGRID), Delft, 13–16 May 2013, pp. 474–481. New York: IEEE.
15.
NielsenMAChuangIL (2000) Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ShorPW (1994) Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring. In: Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science, Kosice, Slovakia, 22–26 August 1994, pp. 124–134.
18.
ShorPW (1995) Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory. Physical Review A52: R2493–R2496. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.52.R2493.
19.
ShorPW (1997) Polynomial-time algoritms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM Journal on Computing26: 1484–1509.
20.
SmelyanskiyMSawayaNPDAspuru-GuzikA (2016) PSTER: the quantum high performance software testing environment. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1601.07195v2 (accessed 1 September 2018).
21.
SteigerDSHänerTTroyerM (2016) ProjectQ: an open source software framework for quantum computing. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.08091 (accessed 28 December 2018).
22.
WeckerDSvoreKM (2014) : a software design architecture and domain-specific language for quantum computing. arXiv:1402.4467v1. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1402.4467v1 (accessed 28 December 2018).
