How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Amplitude amplification with a fixed integer iteration count
Definition
Input a coherent sampler , an orthogonal success projection , and a fixed integer , under the access contract of Prepared unitary and success subspace for amplitude amplification. Additionally supply the good/bad projective instrument , charging each measurement and its implementation costs separately. Prepare . In the displayed right-to-left operator convention, set Apply exactly times. Then apply the projective instrument . On a positive-probability good outcome return its conditional quantum state; on the bad outcome return fail. The conditional state exists only on a positive-probability branch, as in Conditional state for a projective measurement.
For the classical-output specialization, additionally require to be diagonal in the designated output basis and supply a costed verifier. Measure that basis only after the success-projector instrument has accepted; verify the resulting candidate and return it or fail. No arbitrary-projector-to-classical-predicate conversion is implicit.
Remarks
This fixed- procedure makes no controlled- call. Any controlled or inverse access used by an enclosing procedure must be separately declared and charged. The scalar minus sign in is retained exactly.
Depends on
- Prepared unitary and success subspace for amplitude amplification
- Inverse Unitary Access
- Orthogonal-Projector Reflection and Access Contract
- Projector Reflections Are Hermitian Unitary Involutions
- Dirac Notation Conversion
- Quantum query algorithm
- Finite projective measurements
- Projective measurement outcome weights are probabilities
- Conditional state for a projective measurement
Used by
- Exact success amplification by attenuating the good branch Algorithm
- Finite amplification from a supplied success lower bound Algorithm
- HHL finite sine-window phase-estimation algorithm Algorithm
- Iterative no-QFT amplitude estimation by finite-grid likelihood Algorithm
- Known-amplitude amplification with integer rounding Algorithm
- Unknown-amplitude randomized search Algorithm
- Finite capped amplification succeeds with a supplied lower bound Lemma
- Low-target amplification has a controlled multiplicative loss Lemma
- Amplitude-amplification access and resource accounting Proposition
- Exact query count for the finite-grid iterative estimator Theorem
- Exact success probability after amplitude amplification Theorem
- Fixed-round amplitude amplification query count Theorem
- Variable-time amplitude-amplification theorem Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
46 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Gilles Brassard, Peter Høyer, Michele Mosca, and Alain Tapp, Quantum Amplitude Amplification and Estimation (standard reference, not scraped)
- Ronald de Wolf, Quantum Computing: Lecture Notes (standard reference, not scraped)
- Andrew M. Childs, Lecture Notes on Quantum Algorithms (standard reference, not scraped)