This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

\pdfximage

Supplementary_Materials.pdf

thanks: These authors contributed equally to this work.thanks: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Large-scale full-programmable quantum walk and its applications

Yizhi Wang    Yingwen Liu    Junwei Zhan    Shichuan Xue    Yuzhen Zheng    Ru Zeng   
Zhihao Wu
   Zihao Wang    Qilin Zheng    Dongyang Wang    Weixu Shi    Xiang Fu   
Ping Xu
Institute for Quantum Information & State Key Laboratory of High Performance Computing, College of Computer Science and Technology, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China
   Yang Wang National Innovation Institute of Defense Technology, AMS, Beijing 100071, China    Yong Liu    Jiangfang Ding    Guangyao Huang Institute for Quantum Information & State Key Laboratory of High Performance Computing, College of Computer Science and Technology, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China    Chunlin Yu China Greatwall Research Institute, China Greatwall Technology Group CO., LTD., Shenzhen 518057, China    Anqi Huang Institute for Quantum Information & State Key Laboratory of High Performance Computing, College of Computer Science and Technology, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China    Xiaogang Qiang [email protected] National Innovation Institute of Defense Technology, AMS, Beijing 100071, China    Mingtang Deng    Weixia Xu    Kai Lu [email protected]    Xuejun Yang    Junjie Wu [email protected] Institute for Quantum Information & State Key Laboratory of High Performance Computing, College of Computer Science and Technology, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China
Abstract

With photonics, the quantum computational advantage has been demonstrated on the task of boson sampling. Next, developing quantum-enhanced approaches for practical problems becomes one of the top priorities for photonic systems. Quantum walks are powerful kernels for developing new and useful quantum algorithms. Here we realize large-scale quantum walks using a fully programmable photonic quantum computing system. The system integrates a silicon quantum photonic chip, enabling the simulation of quantum walk dynamics on graphs with up to 400 vertices and possessing full programmability over quantum walk parameters, including the particle property, initial state, graph structure, and evolution time. In the 400-dimensional Hilbert space, the average fidelity of random entangled quantum states after the whole on-chip circuit evolution reaches as high as 94.29±\pm1.28%\%. With the system, we demonstrated exponentially faster hitting and quadratically faster mixing performance of quantum walks over classical random walks, achieving more than two orders of magnitude of enhancement in the experimental hitting efficiency and almost half of the reduction in the experimental evolution time for mixing. We utilize the system to implement a series of quantum applications, including measuring the centrality of scale-free networks, searching targets on Erdös-Rényi networks, distinguishing non-isomorphic graph pairs, and simulating the topological phase of higher-order topological insulators. Our work shows one feasible path for quantum photonics to address applications of practical interests in the near future.

Quantum computers have long been the anchor of hope for outperforming classical computers on a number of tasks [1, 2]. Recently in bulk optics [3, 4], quantum computational advantages have been demonstrated on a classically intractable problem, i.e., boson sampling. Besides, integrated photonics also showed the potential for implementing boson sampling [5]. The standard boson sampling that constitutes multiple indistinguishable bosons undergoing coherent evolution in a Haar-random linear network can be viewed as an instance of quantum walks (QWs), while QWs define quantum dynamics of various particles on general graphs [6]. QWs become promising quantum computation primitives since problem instances can be encoded into and further solved via the evolution dynamics of QWs with the properly chosen particle property and graph structure. Many QW-based algorithms have shown quantum-enhanced performances in applications of practical interests, such as searching, analyzing, and learning complex networks [7]. QWs on designed networks can also model quantum dynamics in the fields of physics [8], chemistry [9], and biology [10], and even realize universal quantum computation [11].

To exploit the potentials of QWs, physical apparatus with multiple particles and large-scale evolution graphs are essential. Moreover, the full programmability of particle properties and graph geometry is imperative to tackle different applications. QWs have been experimentally demonstrated on various platforms, such as photons [12, 13, 14, 15], superconducting qubits [16], trapped ions [17], neutral atoms [18], and nuclear magnetic resonance systems [19]. It remains challenging to simultaneously combine all the capabilities for realizing the large-scale and full-programmable quantum walks. In 2021, we reported a preliminary silicon photonic device capable of simulating QW dynamics in a 25-dimensional Hilbert space with all parameter programmability [20]. Here, as shown in Fig.1A, we now present a full-stack photonic computing system, YH QUANTA QW2020 (银河鲲腾QW2020 in Chinese). The system can implement full-programmable QWs in a 400-dimensional Hilbert space with improved accuracy and also take complete control over QW parameters, including the particle property, initial state, graph structure, and evolution time.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Overview of YH QUANTA QW2020 system. (A) The photograph of the whole system. The whole system is compactly contained within an 85cm×\times60cm×\times55cm portable case, excluding the detection module. (B) Schematic of the system stack. The software stack compiles quantum algorithms into quantum walk settings and then converts them to operations in hardware. At the bottom of the hardware stack is the packaged photonic chip module engineering two-photon states in a 400-dimensional Hilbert space, in which the embedded programmable silicon photonic chip is fully packaged. The control signals are transmitted via a self-developed 512-channel electronic control module. Pumped by an amplified laser and evolved through the chip, generated photon pairs are recorded by a peripheral detection module. The entire system stack is mastered by a small single-board computer.

Now consider the continuous-time QWs (CTQWs) of a single particle on an NN-vertex graph GG with adjacency matrix 𝑨\bm{A}. The system can be described by the Hamiltonian H=𝑨H=\bm{A}. The single-particle CTQW evolution follows

|ψ(t)=eiHt|ψini,\ket{\psi(t)}=\mathrm{e}^{-iHt}\ket{\psi_{ini}}, (1)

where HH is the Hamiltonian on graph GG, |ψini\ket{\psi_{ini}} is the initial state and |ψ(t)\ket{\psi(t)} is the evolved state at time tt. When multiple particles get involved, the dimension of the corresponding Hilbert space can grow exponentially with the number of particles. A multiple-particle CTQW can be applied to simulate single-particle CTQW on an exponentially large graph, with the geometry of the large graph determined by the particle indistinguishability and exchange symmetry [20]. For example, the single-particle CTQW on an NPN^{P}-vertex Cartesian product graph GD(P)G^{(P)}_{D}, of which the adjacency matrix is 𝑨D(P)=𝑨P\bm{A}^{(P)}_{D}=\bm{A}^{\oplus P}, can be simulated by PP fully distinguishable particles evolution on graph GG [21]. When the particles are fully indistinguishable, the dimensions of the simulated larger graph for PP bosons (denoted as GB(P)G^{(P)}_{B}) and PP fermions (denoted as GF(P)G^{(P)}_{F}) are (N+P1P){N+P-1\choose P} and (NP){N\choose P}, respectively [22]. The explicit representation of the constructed large graph can be found in the supplementary materials [23]. These schemes make it possible that instead of directly implementing single-particle CTQW evolution on exponentially sized graph G(P){GD(P),GB(P),GF(P)}G^{(P)}\in\{G^{(P)}_{D},G^{(P)}_{B},G^{(P)}_{F}\}, we can simulate its dynamics via a multi-particle CTQW on a NN-vertex graph GG with only polynomial resource cost [23].

Experimentally, following our previous design [20], we simulated two-particle CTQWs by sending each particle of the entangled two photons through identical copies of a single-particle CTQW evolution U=eiHtU=\mathrm{e}^{-iHt}. The core of the system is one of the largest-scale programmable silicon quantum photonic chips. The chip monolithically integrates two spontaneous four-wave mixing photon-pair sources and two 20-mode universal linear optical circuits with fixed inputs. By tuning the generated entangled two-photon state, particles can be controlled with covering the entire spectrum from distinguishable to fully indistinguishable and from bosonic to fermionic exchange symmetry. Each of the two linear optical circuits can be configured to implement arbitrary state preparation and CTQW evolution in a Hilbert space with up to 20 dimensions. The whole chip enables the simulations of single-particle CTQWs on G(2)G^{(2)} graphs with up to 400 vertices and has full control over all QW parameters, including particle property, initial state, graph structure, and evolution time.

As shown in Fig.1B, the system is built following a hierarchical quantum computing stack [24] that matches QW-based applications to physical hardware operations. At the top levels, quantum algorithms are expected to be modeled as QWs with various particle properties and evolution graphs. At the middle level, the quantum walk interface translates algorithms to the corresponding parameters of QWs, and then compiles QW parameters into hardware operations. The device driver level interacts with the programmable photonic chip to perform configuration and output detection of the chip. At the bottom of the stack, we have a packaged photonic chip module engineering two-photon states in a 400-dimensional Hilbert space, in which the embedded photonic chip is optically, electronically, and thermally packaged. A small single-board computer mastered all these distributed subsystems. We verify the high-precision of our system with one thousand randomized entangled quantum states in a 400-dimensional Hilbert space, which are generated by applying Haar-random unitary transformations to the programmable entangled two-photon. The average fidelity between the obtained and theoretical probability distributions of the evolved quantum states reaches 94.29±1.28%94.29\pm 1.28\%. Once assembled and calibrated, the system has been in continuous operation for over twenty months.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Exponentially fast hitting and quadratically fast mixing behaviors of quantum walks. (A) Exponentially fast hitting on RGTs. The 10-layer eRGT is generated via two-boson CTQW on 5-layer RGT. (A1) and (A2) compare the probability distributions when optimal hitting occurs for CTRW and CTQW. Colorbar showing the color scale is presented. In contrast with the optimal scenario (almost uniform distribution) in CTRW (0.95%0.95\%), quantum hitting efficiency (70.59%70.59\%) achieves more than two orders of enhancement. (A3) shows a fitted linear decrease trend for the quantum hitting efficiency, while classical hitting meets with an exponential drop. The experimentally obtained results (blue triangles) of CTQWs on 6-layer and 10-layer eRGTs are entirely consistent with theoretical predictions (brown circles). (B) Exponentially fast hitting on eCubes. Compared with the optimal hitting efficiency in CTRW (B1, 0.73%0.73\%), CTQW (A2, 95.82%95.82\%) also achieves more than two orders of enhancement on the 8-layer eCube generated via two-boson CTQW on the 4-layer hypercube. The exponential speedups of quantum hitting over classical hitting are shown in (A3) and (B3) with a logarithmic coordinate. (C)-(D) Quadratically fast mixing on eNets and eGrids. (C1) and (D1) show the 20-layer eNet (generated via two-boson on 20-vertex cycle) and the 36-layer eGrid (generated via two-boson CTQW on 19-vertex line), with the start vertices colored in green. (C2) and (D2) compare the ϵ\epsilon-mixing evolution time (ϵ=0.25\epsilon=0.25) between quantum and classical mixing on eNets and eGrids with different sizes, respectively. The fitted data shows a clear linear trend for the quantum mixing, while the classical scenario needs a quadratically larger evolution time.
Refer to caption
Figure 3: Demonstrations of CTQW-based applications using the system. (A) Centrality measure. (A1) A 55-vertex scale-free random network, with vertex size indicating centrality. The empty circles represent the theoretical eigenvector centrality, with experimentally determined CTQW centrality value overlaid. (A2) Comparison between eigenvector centralities and CTQW centrality. The similarity of eigenvector centrality and experimentally-obtained CTQW centrality is 95.68%95.68\%. All centrality measures strongly agree on the top-ranked vertices, with slight variations for the lower-ranked vertices. (B) Spatial search test. (B1) An example of a 210-vertex Erdos-Renyi network. The initial positions of the quantum walker are colored in green, and the targets are brown. (B2) The statistical optimal search time grows as 𝒪(N)\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{N}) as network size NN scales from 10 to 210, while the search efficiency stabilizes around 0.5. We test spatial search on 100 Erdos-Renyi networks for each NN. (C) Graph isomorphism determination. (C1) A 210-vertex graph (central), its isomorphic (left) and non-isomorphic (right) graphs. Graphs are plotted in a circular embedding layout. (C2) Total variance distance of CTQW-based graph certificates between the isomorphic pair remains stable around 0 (0.1013) during evolution, in contrast to the value of the non-isomorphic pair (1.2476 in theory and 1.0122 in the experiment) far greater than 0. The average of fidelities in the experiments for graph certificates reaches 94.76±1.08%94.76\pm 1.08\%. (D) Topological phase simulation. (D1) and (D3) present the 2D SSH model and the BBH model, respectively. Each unit cell (dashed box) consists of four vertices. The values of vv (v-v) and ww (w-w) represent the amplitudes of intracellular and intercellular hopping. (D2) shows that the long-time AMCDs on the y dimension of the 2D SSH model gradually approach the theoretical values. The experimental asymptotic results are 0.498±0.0010.498\pm 0.001 for topological phases and 0.013±0.0030.013\pm 0.003 for trivial phases. Similarly, in (D4) the long-time AMCDs values 0.513±0.0020.513\pm 0.002 (0.014±0.0030.014\pm 0.003) for topological (trivial) phases also finally stabilize around the theoretical values of the BBH model.

Before attempting to implement quantum algorithms based on QWs, it is first of profound importance to study their dynamics features. Once the underlying graphs of QWs increase to hundreds of vertices, quantum speedups could be obviously demonstrated in experiments. One of the most prominent QWs’ features is the fast hitting ability on graphs, that is, to propagate from one vertex to another remote one more efficiently than classical random walks (CRWs) and even any known classical algorithms [25]. On a hexagonal structure, quadratic speedups have been demonstrated [26]. However, the dynamics of exponentially fast hitting remain unexplored in experiments due to the need for complicated arrangements of exponentially increasing vertices. With the capabilities to access the exponentially expanded Hilbert space, our system is able to carry out the first experimental observation of the hitting dynamics on eRGTs (that are extended-RGTs generated via two-boson CTQW on RGTs) with up to 105 vertices and eCube (extended-Cubes generated via two-boson CTQW on Hypercubes) with up to 136 vertices. In Fig.2A and Fig.2B, we compared the optimal hitting distribution and efficiency of CTQWs and CRWs. Nearly two orders of magnitude of enhancement in the hitting efficiency of CTQW experiments (0.7059, 0.9582) over CRWs (0.0095, 0.0073) are demonstrated on the 10-layer eRGT and 8-layer eCube, during which processes the average of the fidelities between the experimental and theoretical probability distributions are 96.28±1.86%96.28\pm 1.86\% and 97.98±1.06%97.98\pm 1.06\%, respectively. The optimal hitting occurs at a polynomial time both for CTQWs and CRWs. However, the optimal hitting efficiency of CRWs falls exponentially with layer depth, in contrast with the polynomial decrease tendency of CTQWs, verifying an exponential quantum speedup over the hitting performance by CRWs. We also demonstrated quadratically fast hitting performance on nets and grids with up to 210 vertices, which are the largest-scale experimental demonstrations of fast hitting dynamics up to now [23].

Another essential feature of QW dynamics is known as mixing [27]. Although unitary QWs hardly converge to stationary distributions as CRWs, one can capture a dynamically stabilized situation by observing the long-time average distribution of quantum walkers on the graphs. Of much significance to the heart of quantum speedups for many QW-based algorithms [28] is quantum mixing time [29], that is, the minimum time required for a QW to converge close to its average limiting distribution. However, the demands for long-time stability and intensively repeated measurements remain challenges for the experimental investigation. From the overall mixing process depicted by our system, we observed nearly quadratic speedups of CTQW mixing over CRW on eNets (Fig.2C) and eGrids (Fig.2D). Compared to CRWs, CTQWs on the 20-layer net and the 36-layer grid almost halve in the evolution time for mixing. For the mixing on the largest-scale net, the average of the fidelities between the experimental and theoretical probability distributions is 96.28±1.86%96.28\pm 1.86\%, and the similarity between measured and theoretical limiting distribution reaches 99.76%99.76\%. See more details in the supplementary materials [23]. As far as we know, these are the first experimental demonstrations of QW mixing dynamics.

Additionally, we implemented four QW-based applications on large-scale graphs using our system. (1) Centrality measure. Based on QWs, quantum-enhanced algorithms were proposed for ranking the vertex centrality of graphs and further used for large-scale network analysis [30]. We performed a CTQW-based centrality measure algorithm on eScale-free random networks. Fig.3A presents the experimentally obtained CTQW-based centrality results of a 55-vertex eScale-free network, which correlates well with its eigenvector centrality (similarity = 95.68%). This is the largest-scale experimental realization of CTQW-based centrality measure to date that validates the potential of the QW in large-scale network analysis. (2) Search on networks. Finding marked vertices in a graph can be solved in the framework of QWs. It has been proved that CTQWs can search on almost all graphs of size NN in time 𝒪(N)\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{N}) and thus provide quadratic speedup over classical algorithms [31]. We benchmarked the performance of a CTQW-based search algorithm [20] on 1,000 randomly eErdös-Rényi networks with sizes ranging from 15 to 210. With the experimental data statistics, we show the optimal search time starting from three vertices to find the other three marked vertices scales as 0.8026N+4.068950.8026\sqrt{N}+4.06895 (Fig.3B) and experimentally demonstrate the quadratic speedup for the first time. (3) Graph isomorphism test. Another application of QWs is to tackle the graph isomorphism problem, that is, determining whether two given graphs are isomorphic (two graphs are isomorphic if one can be obtained from the other by relabeling the vertices). To demonstrate a CTQW-based algorithm [20] on graphs with 210 vertices, we constructed the graph certificates from experimentally obtained CTQW evolution results. By comparing the total variance distance of graph certificates between graphs, their isomorphism is distinguished. As shown in Fig.3C, the experimental and theoretical results are highly consistent. For the isomorphic graph pair, the average distance of graph certificates is close to 0, while non-isomorphic graphs achieve a much larger distance. (4) Topological phase simulation. By encoding the property of particles and geometry of graphs, QWs can be used to model a wide variety of physical systems and processes. As shown in Fig.3, we demonstrated the topological invariants of two typical higher-order topological insulators, the 2D Su-Schrieffer-Hegger (SSH) model [32] and Benalcazar-Bernevig-Hughes (BBH) model [33], by probing the long-time averaged values of extended mean chiral displacement (AMCD) [34] and mean chiral quadrupole moment (AMCQM) [35] in single-particle and two-fermion CTQWs, respectively. The bulk topology of the 2D SSH model should be characterized by two topological invariants along the xx and yy dimensions. The experimental asymptotic values of AMCD in topological phases of the 2D SSH model are (0.470±0.002,0.498±0.001)(0.470\pm 0.002,0.498\pm 0.001), which are obviously distinct from the values in trivial phases, (0.046±0.004,0.013±0.003)(-0.046\pm 0.004,0.013\pm 0.003). In Fig.3, we present the results along the yy dimension as an example. Similarly, the experimental asymptotic values of AMCQM of the BBH model are 0.513±0.0020.513\pm 0.002 in topological phases and 0.014±0.0030.014\pm 0.003 in trivial phases. All these demonstrations of applications showcased the potential of our system for practical large-scale network analysis and the field of many-body system quantum simulations.

In conclusion, we have designed and realized a full-stack photonic quantum computing system for simulating universal large-scale QWs and their applications. It allows investigating unique QW dynamics features on large-scale graphs, where we experimentally demonstrated the exponential quantum speedup in hitting and the quadratically quantum speedup in mixing for the first time. Using the system, we also demonstrated versatile applications in high precision, from graph-theoretic applications and quantum simulations of topological phases. Our work shows that the dedicated integrated photonic system with particular QW models paves a viable path to bring quantum photonics to fruition in practical applications. With the rapid development of integrated quantum photonics [36, 37, 38], such quantum photonics-enabled computers would be accelerated to achieve practical quantum advantages.

References

  • Feynman [1982] R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 21, 467 (1982).
  • Shor [1997] P. W. Shor, Polynomial-Time Algorithms for Prime Factorization and Discrete Logarithms on a Quantum Computer, SIAM Journal on Computing 26, 1484 (1997).
  • Zhong et al. [2020] H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu, P. Hu, X.-Y. Yang, W.-J. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Li, X. Jiang, L. Gan, G. Yang, L. You, Z. Wang, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Quantum computational advantage using photons, Science 370, 1460 (2020).
  • Madsen et al. [2022] L. S. Madsen, F. Laudenbach, M. F. Askarani, F. Rortais, T. Vincent, J. F. F. Bulmer, F. M. Miatto, L. Neuhaus, L. G. Helt, M. J. Collins, A. E. Lita, T. Gerrits, S. W. Nam, V. D. Vaidya, M. Menotti, I. Dhand, Z. Vernon, N. Quesada, and J. Lavoie, Quantum computational advantage with a programmable photonic processor, Nature 606, 75 (2022).
  • Alexeev et al. [2021] Y. Alexeev, D. Bacon, K. R. Brown, R. Calderbank, L. D. Carr, F. T. Chong, B. DeMarco, D. Englund, E. Farhi, B. Fefferman, A. V. Gorshkov, A. Houck, J. Kim, S. Kimmel, M. Lange, S. Lloyd, M. D. Lukin, D. Maslov, P. Maunz, C. Monroe, J. Preskill, M. Roetteler, M. J. Savage, and J. Thompson, Quantum Computer Systems for Scientific Discovery, PRX Quantum 2, 017001 (2021).
  • Aharonov et al. [1993] Y. Aharonov, L. Davidovich, and N. Zagury, Quantum random walks, Physical Review A 48, 1687 (1993).
  • Biamonte et al. [2019] J. Biamonte, M. Faccin, and M. De Domenico, Complex networks from classical to quantum, Communications Physics 2, 53 (2019).
  • Qiang et al. [2016] X. Qiang, T. Loke, A. Montanaro, K. Aungskunsiri, X. Zhou, J. L. O’Brien, J. B. Wang, and J. C. F. Matthews, Efficient quantum walk on a quantum processor, Nature Communications 7, 11511 (2016).
  • Bauer et al. [2020] B. Bauer, S. Bravyi, M. Motta, and G. K.-L. Chan, Quantum Algorithms for Quantum Chemistry and Quantum Materials Science, Chemical Reviews 120, 12685 (2020).
  • Mohseni et al. [2008] M. Mohseni, P. Rebentrost, S. Lloyd, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Environment-assisted quantum walks in photosynthetic energy transfer, The Journal of Chemical Physics 129, 174106 (2008).
  • Childs et al. [2013] A. M. Childs, D. Gosset, and Z. Webb, Universal Computation by Multiparticle Quantum Walk, Science 339, 791 (2013).
  • Harris et al. [2017] N. C. Harris, G. R. Steinbrecher, M. Prabhu, Y. Lahini, J. Mower, D. Bunandar, C. Chen, F. N. C. Wong, T. Baehr-Jones, M. Hochberg, S. Lloyd, and D. Englund, Quantum transport simulations in a programmable nanophotonic processor, Nature Photonics 11, 447 (2017).
  • Benedetti et al. [2021] C. Benedetti, D. Tamascelli, M. G. Paris, and A. Crespi, Quantum Spatial Search in Two-Dimensional Waveguide Arrays, Physical Review Applied 16, 054036 (2021).
  • Xu et al. [2021] X.-Y. Xu, X.-W. Wang, D.-Y. Chen, C. M. Smith, and X.-M. Jin, Quantum transport in fractal networks, Nature Photonics 15, 703 (2021).
  • Qu et al. [2022] D. Qu, S. Marsh, K. Wang, L. Xiao, J. Wang, and P. Xue, Deterministic Search on Star Graphs via Quantum Walks, Physical Review Letters 128, 050501 (2022).
  • Gong et al. [2021] M. Gong, S. Wang, C. Zha, M.-C. Chen, H.-L. Huang, Y. Wu, Q. Zhu, Y. Zhao, S. Li, S. Guo, H. Qian, Y. Ye, F. Chen, C. Ying, J. Yu, D. Fan, D. Wu, H. Su, H. Deng, H. Rong, K. Zhang, S. Cao, J. Lin, Y. Xu, L. Sun, C. Guo, N. Li, F. Liang, V. M. Bastidas, K. Nemoto, W. J. Munro, Y.-H. Huo, C.-Y. Lu, C.-Z. Peng, X. Zhu, and J.-W. Pan, Quantum walks on a programmable two-dimensional 62-qubit superconducting processor, Science 372, 948 (2021).
  • Huerta Alderete et al. [2020] C. Huerta Alderete, S. Singh, N. H. Nguyen, D. Zhu, R. Balu, C. Monroe, C. M. Chandrashekar, and N. M. Linke, Quantum walks and Dirac cellular automata on a programmable trapped-ion quantum computer, Nature Communications 11, 3720 (2020).
  • Karski et al. [2009] M. Karski, L. Förster, J.-M. Choi, A. Steffen, W. Alt, D. Meschede, and A. Widera, Quantum Walk in Position Space with Single Optically Trapped Atoms, Science 325, 174 (2009).
  • Ryan et al. [2005] C. A. Ryan, M. Laforest, J. C. Boileau, and R. Laflamme, Experimental implementation of a discrete-time quantum random walk on an NMR quantum-information processor, Physical Review A 72, 062317 (2005).
  • Qiang et al. [2021] X. Qiang, Y. Wang, S. Xue, R. Ge, L. Chen, Y. Liu, A. Huang, X. Fu, P. Xu, T. Yi, F. Xu, M. Deng, J. B. Wang, J. D. A. Meinecke, J. C. F. Matthews, X. Cai, X. Yang, and J. Wu, Implementing graph-theoretic quantum algorithms on a silicon photonic quantum walk processor, Science Advances 7, eabb8375 (2021).
  • Izaac and Wang [2017] J. A. Izaac and J. B. Wang, Systematic dimensionality reduction for continuous-time quantum walks of interacting fermions, Physical Review E 96, 032136 (2017).
  • Rudinger et al. [2012] K. Rudinger, J. K. Gamble, M. Wellons, E. Bach, M. Friesen, R. Joynt, and S. N. Coppersmith, Noninteracting multiparticle quantum random walks applied to the graph isomorphism problem for strongly regular graphs, Physical Review A 86, 022334 (2012).
  • [23] Materials and methods are available as supplementary materials.
  • Fu et al. [2017] X. Fu, M. A. Rol, C. C. Bultink, J. van Someren, N. Khammassi, I. Ashraf, R. F. L. Vermeulen, J. C. de Sterke, W. J. Vlothuizen, R. N. Schouten, C. G. Almudever, L. DiCarlo, and K. Bertels, An experimental microarchitecture for a superconducting quantum processor, in Proceedings of the 50th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (ACM, Cambridge Massachusetts, 2017) pp. 813–825.
  • Childs et al. [2003] A. M. Childs, R. Cleve, E. Deotto, E. Farhi, S. Gutmann, and D. A. Spielman, Exponential algorithmic speedup by a quantum walk, in Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’03 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2003) pp. 59–68.
  • Tang et al. [2018] H. Tang, C. Di Franco, Z.-Y. Shi, T.-S. He, Z. Feng, J. Gao, K. Sun, Z.-M. Li, Z.-Q. Jiao, T.-Y. Wang, M. S. Kim, and X.-M. Jin, Experimental quantum fast hitting on hexagonal graphs, Nature Photonics 12, 754 (2018).
  • Aharonov et al. [2001] D. Aharonov, A. Ambainis, J. Kempe, and U. Vazirani, Quantum walks on graphs, in Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing - STOC ’01 (ACM Press, Hersonissos, Greece, 2001) pp. 50–59.
  • Wocjan and Abeyesinghe [2008] P. Wocjan and A. Abeyesinghe, Speedup via quantum sampling, Physical Review A 78, 042336 (2008).
  • Chakraborty et al. [2020] S. Chakraborty, K. Luh, and J. Roland, How Fast Do Quantum Walks Mix?, Physical Review Letters 124, 050501 (2020).
  • Izaac et al. [2017] J. A. Izaac, X. Zhan, Z. Bian, K. Wang, J. Li, J. B. Wang, and P. Xue, Centrality measure based on continuous-time quantum walks and experimental realization, Physical Review A 95, 032318 (2017).
  • Chakraborty et al. [2016] S. Chakraborty, L. Novo, A. Ambainis, and Y. Omar, Spatial Search by Quantum Walk is Optimal for Almost all Graphs, Physical Review Letters 116, 100501 (2016).
  • Liu and Wakabayashi [2017] F. Liu and K. Wakabayashi, Novel Topological Phase with a Zero Berry Curvature, Physical Review Letters 118, 076803 (2017).
  • Benalcazar et al. [2017] W. A. Benalcazar, B. A. Bernevig, and T. L. Hughes, Quantized electric multipole insulators, Science 357, 61 (2017).
  • Maffei et al. [2018] M. Maffei, A. Dauphin, F. Cardano, M. Lewenstein, and P. Massignan, Topological characterization of chiral models through their long time dynamics, New Journal of Physics 20, 013023 (2018).
  • Mizoguchi et al. [2021] T. Mizoguchi, Y. Kuno, and Y. Hatsugai, Detecting Bulk Topology of Quadrupolar Phase from Quench Dynamics, Physical Review Letters 126, 016802 (2021).
  • Politi et al. [2008] A. Politi, M. J. Cryan, J. G. Rarity, S. Yu, and J. L. O’Brien, Silica-on-Silicon Waveguide Quantum Circuits, Science 320, 646 (2008).
  • Qiang et al. [2018] X. Qiang, X. Zhou, J. Wang, C. M. Wilkes, T. Loke, S. O’Gara, L. Kling, G. D. Marshall, R. Santagati, T. C. Ralph, J. B. Wang, J. L. O’Brien, M. G. Thompson, and J. C. F. Matthews, Large-scale silicon quantum photonics implementing arbitrary two-qubit processing, Nature Photonics 12, 534 (2018).
  • Bartolucci et al. [2021] S. Bartolucci, P. Birchall, H. Bombin, H. Cable, C. Dawson, M. Gimeno-Segovia, E. Johnston, K. Kieling, N. Nickerson, M. Pant, F. Pastawski, T. Rudolph, and C. Sparrow, Fusion-based quantum computation (2021), arXiv:2101.09310 [quant-ph] .
  • Matthews et al. [2013] J. C. F. Matthews, K. Poulios, J. D. A. Meinecke, A. Politi, A. Peruzzo, N. Ismail, K. Wörhoff, M. G. Thompson, and J. L. O’Brien, Observing fermionic statistics with photons in arbitrary processes, Scientific Reports 3, 1539 (2013).
  • Reck et al. [1994] M. Reck, A. Zeilinger, H. J. Bernstein, and P. Bertani, Experimental realization of any discrete unitary operator, Physical Review Letters 73, 58 (1994).
  • Cross et al. [2019] A. W. Cross, L. S. Bishop, S. Sheldon, P. D. Nation, and J. M. Gambetta, Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits, Physical Review A 100, 032328 (2019).