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.
A non-coprime phase gives a proper order divisor
Example
Let and . The powers modulo are , so the order is . Here , , and . In the Fourier orbit, phase index gives phase , nearest label , and reduced phase fraction . Its candidate denominator is , but , so the order test rejects it. Phase index gives phase , label , denominator , and , so this candidate is retained. The phase index is sampled from the order-four Fourier mixture, and the minimum rule never calls the rejected proper divisor the order.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The order-finding instructions, the exact order criterion, and the Fourier phase law.
The algorithm retains a reconstructed denominator only after the exact test , and returns the smallest retained denominator (Modular order finding with rational reconstruction).
A superposition of eigenspaces produces the eigenspace-weighted phase-estimation mixture, and exact grid phases are returned with probability one (Phase estimation on a superposition of eigenspaces, Phase-estimation nearest-grid and tail bounds).
A nearest phase label for a reduced phase of denominator reconstructs that reduced fraction (Correctness of phase-sample rational reconstruction).
If has order , then exactly when (If then iff is an integer multiple of , the powers are distinct, and has exactly elements; if has infinite order then only for ).
For true order , the repeated algorithm returns the minimum retained candidate; an exact denominator- sample therefore suffices (Success probability and repetition for modular order finding).
Proof
Direct multiplication gives , , , and , with no earlier power equal to ; thus the order is exactly . The specified register size gives , , and .
For , the phase reduces to , so the exact grid label is . Applying [F3] with reduced numerator , denominator , and gives reconstructed denominator . The verification test is , hence [F1] rejects this candidate.
The four vectors are eigenvectors with phases : multiplication by cycles , and shifting the sum multiplies it by . The four-term geometric sum gives , so [F2] assigns weight to each phase and returns its exact grid label. For , ; [F3] reconstructs denominator , and , so [F1] retains it. Thus both the rejected outcome and a successful outcome have positive probability.
By [F4], every retained denominator is a multiple of . The bad denominator is rejected by step 2.1, while the denominator- sample in step 2.2 is retained; [F5] then makes the minimum retained value . This example verifies that a reconstructed divisor is never silently reported as the exact order.
Depends on
- Modular order finding with rational reconstruction
- Success probability and repetition for modular order finding
- Correctness of phase-sample rational reconstruction
- Phase estimation on a superposition of eigenspaces
- Phase-estimation nearest-grid and tail bounds
- If $\operatorname{ord}(g) = n$ then $g^{k} = e$ iff $k$ is an integer multiple of $n$, the powers $g^{0}, \dots, g^{n-1}$ are distinct, and $\langle g \rangle$ has exactly $n$ elements; if $g$ has infinite order then $g^{j} = g^{k}$ only for $j = k$
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
89 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
- Andrew M. Childs, Lecture Notes on Quantum Algorithms, §9 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Ronald de Wolf, Quantum Computing: Lecture Notes, arXiv:1907.09415v6 (standard reference, not scraped)