Cited by 289Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Mechanics and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantum Computers, Factoring, and Decoherence

Open access

Abstract

It is known that quantum computers can dramatically speed up the task of finding factors of large numbers, a problem of practical significance for cryptographic applications. Factors of an L -digit number can be found in ∼ L 2 time [compared to ∼exp( L 1/3 ) time] by a quantum computer, which simultaneously follows all paths corresponding to distinct classical inputs, obtaining the solution from the coherent quantum interference of the alternatives. Here it is shown how the decoherence process degrades the interference pattern that emerges from the quantum factoring algorithm. For a quantum computer performing logical operations, an exponential decay of quantum coherence is inevitable. However, even in the presence of exponential decoherence, quantum computation can be useful as long as a sufficiently low decoherence rate can be achieved to allow meaningful results to be extracted from the calculation.

Overview

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 · 10.1126/science.270.5242.1633

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. GRAHAM R, CONCRETE MATH (1994).
  2. LANDAUER R, 4 P DREX S QUANT NON (1995).
  3. LENSTRA A, HDB THEORETICAL COMP A, 673 (1990).
  4. MONROE C, DEMONSTRATION UNIVER (1995).
  5. SHOR P.W., 35TH P ANN S F COMP 124, (1994).
  6. ZUREK W.H., FRONTIERS NONEQUILIB 151, (1986).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–289 of 289

Metadata

Authors
Chuang, I. L., Laflamme, R., Shor, P. W., & Zurek, W. H.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Los Alamos National Laboratory (US)
  • AT&T (United States) (US)
Venue
Science
Published
1995-12-08
Volume
270
Issue
5242
Pages
1633-1635
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2107050628
Cited by
289
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
37.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
Keywords
quantum computing hardware, quantum factoring, decoherence, Shor's algorithm, quantum interference, quantum coherence, cryptographic security, decoherence rate

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