Results 1 
3 of
3
Towards applying computational complexity to foundations of physics
 Notes of Mathematical Seminars of St. Petersburg Department of Steklov Institute of Mathematics
, 2004
"... In one of his early papers, D. Grigoriev analyzed the decidability and computational complexity of different physical theories. This analysis was motivated by the hope that this analysis would help physicists. In this paper, we survey several similar ideas that may be of help to physicists. We hope ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (17 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In one of his early papers, D. Grigoriev analyzed the decidability and computational complexity of different physical theories. This analysis was motivated by the hope that this analysis would help physicists. In this paper, we survey several similar ideas that may be of help to physicists. We hope that further research may lead to useful physical applications. 1
Fast Quantum Algorithms for Handling Probabilistic and Interval Uncertainty
, 2003
"... this paper, we show how the use of quantum computing can speed up some computations related to interval and probabilistic uncertainty. We end the paper with speculations on whether (and how) "hypothetic" physical devices can compute NPhard problems faster than in exponential time ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper, we show how the use of quantum computing can speed up some computations related to interval and probabilistic uncertainty. We end the paper with speculations on whether (and how) "hypothetic" physical devices can compute NPhard problems faster than in exponential time
mlq header will be provided by the publisher Fast Quantum Algorithms for Handling Probabilistic and Interval Uncertainty
, 2003
"... In many reallife situations, we are interested in the value of a physical quantity y that is difficult or impossible to measure directly. To estimate y, we find some easiertomeasure quantities x1,..., xn which are related to y by a known relation y = f(x1,..., xn). Measurements are never 100 % ac ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In many reallife situations, we are interested in the value of a physical quantity y that is difficult or impossible to measure directly. To estimate y, we find some easiertomeasure quantities x1,..., xn which are related to y by a known relation y = f(x1,..., xn). Measurements are never 100 % accurate; hence, the measured values ˜xi are different from xi, and the resulting estimate ˜y = f(˜x1,..., ˜xn) is different from the desired value y = f(x1,..., xn). How different can it be? Traditional engineering approach to error estimation in data processing assumes that we know the probabildef ities of different measurement errors ∆xi = ˜xi − xi. In many practical situations, we only know the upper bound ∆i for this error; hence, after the measurement, the only information that we have about xi is that it def belongs to the interval xi = [˜xi − ∆i, ˜xi + ∆i]. In this case, it is important to find the range y of all possible values of y = f(x1,..., xn) when xi ∈ xi. We start the paper with a brief overview of the computational complexity of the corresponding interval computation problems. Most of the related problems turn out to be, in general, at least NPhard. In this paper, we show how the use of quantum computing can speed up some computations related to interval and probabilistic uncertainty. We end the paper with speculations on whether (and how) “hypothetic ” physical devices can compute NPhard problems faster than in exponential time. Most of the paper’s results were first presented at NAFIPS’2003 [30]. Copyright line will be provided by the publisher 1 Introduction: Data Processing