CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 49Quantum Mechanics and ApplicationsQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and Cryptography

Scheme of thinking quantum systems

Open access
Yukalov, V.I., Sornette, D.·2009·Laser Physics Letters
DOI 10.1002/lapl.200910086
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

A general approach describing quantum decision procedures is developed. The approach can be applied to quantum information processing, quantum computing, creation of artificial quantum intelligence, as well as to analyzing decision processes of human decision makers. Our basic point is to consider an active quantum system possessing its own strategic state. Processing information by such a system is analogous to the cognitive processes associated to decision making by humans. The algebra of probability operators, associated with the possible options available to the decision maker, plays the role of the algebra of observables in quantum theory of measurements. A scheme is advanced for a practical realization of decision procedures by thinking quantum systems. Such thinking quantum systems can be realized by using spin lattices, systems of magnetic molecules, cold atoms trapped in optical lattices, ensembles of quantum dots, or multilevel atomic systems interacting with electromagnetic field.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/lapl.200910086

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. [2]2. C.P. Williams and S.H. Clearwater, Explorations in Quan- tum Computing (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998).
  2. [4]4. D.P. DiVincenzo, Fortschr. Phys. 48, 771 (2000).
  3. [5]5. V. Vedral, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 197 (2002).
  4. [6]6. A. Galindo and M.A. Martín-Delgado, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 347 (2002).
  5. [7]7. M. Keyl, Phys. Rep. 369, 431 (2002).
  6. [10]10. M.J. Machina, in: S.N. Durlauf and L.E. Blume (eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (Macmillan, New York, 2008).
  7. [11]11. V.I. Yukalov and D. Sornette, Phys. Lett. A 372, 6867 (2008).
  8. [13]13. A.S. Sorensen, E. Altman, M. Gullans, J.V. Porto, M.D. Lukin, and E. Demler, arXiv:0906.2567v1 (2009). · arXiv
  9. [14]14. D.A. Huse, Phys. Rev. B 37, 2380 (1988).
  10. [15]15. B. Barbara, L. Thomas, F. Lionti, I. Chiorescu, and A. Sulpice, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 200, 167 (1999).
  11. [16]16. A. Caneschi, D. Gatteschi, C. Sangregorio, R. Sessoli, L. Sorace, A. Cornia, M.A. Novak, C. Paulsen, and W. Werns- dorfer, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 200, 182 (1999).
  12. [17]17. V.I. Yukalov, Laser Phys. 12, 1089 (2002).
  13. [18]18. V.I. Yukalov and E.P. Yukalova, Phys. Part. Nucl. 35, 348 (2004).
  14. [19]19. V.I. Yukalov and E.P. Yukalova, Phys. Part. Nucl. 31, 561 (2000).
  15. [20]20. V.I. Yukalov, Laser Phys. 2, 559 (1992).
  16. [21]21. V.I. Yukalov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3000 (1995).
  17. [22]22. V.I. Yukalov, Phys. Rev. B 53, 9232 (1996).
  18. [23]23. V.I. Yukalov, Phys. Rev. B 71, 184432 (2005).
  19. [24]24. V.I. Yukalov, V.K. Henner, and P.V. Kharebov, Phys. Rev. B 77, 134427 (2008).
  20. [25]25. V.I. Yukalov, V.K. Henner, P.V. Kharebov, and E.P. Yukalova, Laser Phys. Lett. 5, 887 (2008).
  21. [26]26. R.H. Kodama, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 200, 359 (1999).
  22. [27]27. G.C. Hadjipanayis, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 200, 373 (1999).
  23. [28]28. D. Jaksch and P. Zoller, Ann. Phys. 315, 52 (2005).
  24. [29]29. O. Morsch and M. Oberthaler, Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 179 (2006).
  25. [30]30. I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2007).
  26. [31]31. C. Moseley, O. Fialko, and K. Ziegler, Ann. Physik 17, 561 (2008).
  27. [32]32. V.A. Yurovsky, M. Olshanii, and D.S. Weiss, Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 55, 61 (2008).
  28. [33]33. V.I. Yukalov, Laser Phys. 19, 1 (2009).
  29. [34]34. V.I. Yukalov, E.P. Yukalova, and V.S. Bagnato, Phys. Rev. A 56, 4845 (1997).
  30. [35]35. V.I. Yukalov, E.P. Yukalova, and V.S. Bagnato, Phys. Rev. A 66, 043602 (2002).
  31. [36]36. V.I. Yukalov, K.-P. Marzlin, and E.P. Yukalova, Phys. Rev. A 69, 023620 (2004).
  32. [37]37. E.R.F. Ramos, E.A.L. Henn, J.A. Seman, M.A. Caracanhas, K.M.F. Magalhães, K. Helmerson, V.I. Yukalov, and V.S. Bagnato, Phys. Rev. A 78, 063412 (2008).
  33. [38]38. J. Sebby-Strabley, M. Anderlini, P.S. Jessen, and J.V. Porto, Phys. Rev. A 73, 033605 (2006).
  34. [39]39. J. Sebby-Strabley, B.L. Brown, M. Anderlini, P.J. Lee, W.D. Phillips, J.V. Porto, and P.R. Johnson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 200405 (2007).
  35. [40]40. P.J. Lee, M. Anderlini, B.L. Brown, J. Sebby-Strabley, W.D. Phillips, and J.V. Porto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 020402 (2007).
  36. [41]41. M. Anderlini, P.J. Lee, B.L. Brown, J. Sebby-Strabley, W.D. Phillips, and J.V. Porto, Nature 448, 452 (2007).
  37. [42]42. S. Fölling, S. Trotzky, P. Cheinet, M. Feld, R. Saers, A. Widera, T. Müller, and I. Bloch, Nature 448, 1029 (2007).
  38. [43]43. V.I. Yukalov and E.P. Yukalova, Phys. Rev. A 78, 063610 (2008).
  39. [44]44. V.I. Yukalov and E.P. Yukalova, Laser Phys. Lett. 6, 235 (2009).
  40. [45]45. V.I. Yukalov and E.P. Yukalova, Phys. Lett. A 373, 1301 (2009).
  41. [46]46. C. Wang, P.G. Kevrekidis, N. Whitaker, and B.A. Malomed, Physica D 237, 2922 (2008).
  42. [49]49. M. Abdel-Aty and F. Saif, Laser Phys. Lett. 3, 599 (2006).
  43. [50]50. G. Vallone, E. Pomarico, F. De Martini, and P. Mataloni, Laser Phys. Lett. 5, 398 (2008).
  44. [51]51. L.P. Kouwenhoven, D.G. Austing, and S. Tarucha, Rep. Prog. Phys. 64, 701 (2001).
  45. [52]52. S.M. Reimann and M. Manninen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 1283 (2002).
  46. [53]53. C. Yannouleas and U. Landman, Rep. Prog. Phys. 70, 2067 (2007).
  47. [54]54. R.G. Nazmitdinov, Phys. Part. Nucl. 40, 71 (2009).
  48. [55]55. M. Abdel-Aty, M.R.B. Wahiddin, and A.-S.F. Obada, Laser Phys. Lett. 4, 399 (2007).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yukalov, V. I., & Sornette, D.
Affiliations
  • Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (RU)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
ORCID
Venue
Laser Physics Letters
Publisher
IOP Publishing
Published
2009-10
Volume
6
Issue
11
Pages
833-839
ISSN
  • 1612-2011 (ISSN-L)
  • 1612-202X
DOI
10.1002/lapl.200910086
OpenAlex
W2114699395
Cited by
49
References
50
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Laser Physics Letters (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Russian Foundation for Basic Research
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
Keywords
quantum decision making, quantum information processing, quantum computing, human decision-making, quantum measurement theory, spin lattices, magnetic molecules, ultracold atoms in optical lattices, quantum dots, multilevel atoms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review