How to prove that the query oracle is unitary?












5












$begingroup$


The query oracle: $O_{x}|irangle|brangle = |irangle|b oplus x_{i}rangle$ used in algorithms like Deutsch Jozsa is unitary. How do I prove it is unitary?






algorithm quantum-gate unitarity deutsch-jozsa-algorithm







share|improve this question









New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Related: Why are oracles Hermitian by construction?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue♦
    Mar 26 at 12:25
















5












$begingroup$


The query oracle: $O_{x}|irangle|brangle = |irangle|b oplus x_{i}rangle$ used in algorithms like Deutsch Jozsa is unitary. How do I prove it is unitary?






algorithm quantum-gate unitarity deutsch-jozsa-algorithm







share|improve this question









New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Related: Why are oracles Hermitian by construction?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue♦
    Mar 26 at 12:25














5












5








5





$begingroup$


The query oracle: $O_{x}|irangle|brangle = |irangle|b oplus x_{i}rangle$ used in algorithms like Deutsch Jozsa is unitary. How do I prove it is unitary?






algorithm quantum-gate unitarity deutsch-jozsa-algorithm







share|improve this question









New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




The query oracle: $O_{x}|irangle|brangle = |irangle|b oplus x_{i}rangle$ used in algorithms like Deutsch Jozsa is unitary. How do I prove it is unitary?






algorithm quantum-gate unitarity deutsch-jozsa-algorithm




algorithm quantum-gate unitarity deutsch-jozsa-algorithm






share|improve this question









New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 26 at 12:15









Blue♦

6,59041555




6,59041555






New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked Mar 26 at 12:11









DivyatDivyat

283




283




New contributor




Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Divyat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    Related: Why are oracles Hermitian by construction?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue♦
    Mar 26 at 12:25


















  • $begingroup$
    Related: Why are oracles Hermitian by construction?
    $endgroup$
    – Blue♦
    Mar 26 at 12:25
















$begingroup$
Related: Why are oracles Hermitian by construction?
$endgroup$
– Blue♦
Mar 26 at 12:25




$begingroup$
Related: Why are oracles Hermitian by construction?
$endgroup$
– Blue♦
Mar 26 at 12:25










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

Notice that $mathcal O_x$ is a permutation matrix.



The matrix elements are
$$langle j, crvertmathcal O_xlvert i,brangle
=delta_{ij}langle crvert boplus x_irangle
=delta_{ij}delta_{c,boplus x_i}.$$
In other words, $mathcal O_x$ is diagonal with respect to the first register, and, for each block corresponding to a given $i$, connects all and only the indices $b,c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (remember that here $b,c,x_iinmathbb Z_2^{otimes n}$ are length-$n$ bit strings).
Also, notice that for a given $b$ there is no more than one $c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (more precisely, there isn't any such $c$ if $x_i=0$, and there is exactly one if $x_ineq 0$).



It follows that $mathcal O_x$ is a (real) permutation matrix, and such matrices are always unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues (and therefore unitary).
In this case, we have that the eigenvalues of $mathcal O_x$ are $pm1$, and the eigenvectors are, in the case $x_ineq 0$,
$$lvert irangleotimes(lvert branglepmlvert boplus x_irangle)$$
for all $i$ and $b$. If $x_i=0$ then $mathcal O_x$ is the identity, and therefore its spectrum is trivial${}^dagger$.



This shows explicitly that $mathcal O_x$ is unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues, and therefore is unitary.




${}^dagger$ I'm actually being a bit sloppy for the sake of simplicity here. This analysis holds for each different block of $mathcal O_x$ corresponding to a given $i$. More precisely, I should say that $mathcal O_x$ is block-diagonal as it doesn't connect spaces with $ineq j$ on the first register, and each block is either the identity in the subspace in which it acts if $x_i=0$, or a permutation matrix that connects different pairs of basis states if $x_ineq 0$.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    7












    $begingroup$

    Apply it twice:
    $$
    O_xO_x|irangle|brangle=O_x|irangle|boplus x_irangle=|irangle|boplus x_ioplus x_irangle=|irangle|brangle
    $$
    Hence, $O_x$ is its own inverse, and therefore reversible.



    To prove unitarity, it makes more sense to prove that $O_x$ has eigenvectors
    $$
    |irangle(|0rangle+|1rangle)quadtext{and}quad|irangle(|0rangle-|1rangle)
    $$
    for all $i$ with eigenvalues $1$ and $(-1)^{x_i}$ respectively. These are all orthonormal, and span the full Hilbert space. Consequently, the eigenvalues of $O_x$ are all $pm 1$, and therefore $O_x^star=O_x$ (where $^star$ represents the Hermitian conjugate). Thus,
    $$
    O_xO_x^star=mathbb{I},
    $$
    as required for a unitary.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
      $endgroup$
      – Divyat
      Mar 26 at 13:56












    • $begingroup$
      One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
      $endgroup$
      – Divyat
      Mar 26 at 15:52












    • $begingroup$
      This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
      $endgroup$
      – Danylo Y
      Mar 26 at 16:17












    • $begingroup$
      I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
      $endgroup$
      – glS
      Mar 26 at 18:01








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
      $endgroup$
      – DaftWullie
      Mar 27 at 8:44












    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "694"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Divyat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquantumcomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f5779%2fhow-to-prove-that-the-query-oracle-is-unitary%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    Notice that $mathcal O_x$ is a permutation matrix.



    The matrix elements are
    $$langle j, crvertmathcal O_xlvert i,brangle
    =delta_{ij}langle crvert boplus x_irangle
    =delta_{ij}delta_{c,boplus x_i}.$$
    In other words, $mathcal O_x$ is diagonal with respect to the first register, and, for each block corresponding to a given $i$, connects all and only the indices $b,c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (remember that here $b,c,x_iinmathbb Z_2^{otimes n}$ are length-$n$ bit strings).
    Also, notice that for a given $b$ there is no more than one $c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (more precisely, there isn't any such $c$ if $x_i=0$, and there is exactly one if $x_ineq 0$).



    It follows that $mathcal O_x$ is a (real) permutation matrix, and such matrices are always unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues (and therefore unitary).
    In this case, we have that the eigenvalues of $mathcal O_x$ are $pm1$, and the eigenvectors are, in the case $x_ineq 0$,
    $$lvert irangleotimes(lvert branglepmlvert boplus x_irangle)$$
    for all $i$ and $b$. If $x_i=0$ then $mathcal O_x$ is the identity, and therefore its spectrum is trivial${}^dagger$.



    This shows explicitly that $mathcal O_x$ is unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues, and therefore is unitary.




    ${}^dagger$ I'm actually being a bit sloppy for the sake of simplicity here. This analysis holds for each different block of $mathcal O_x$ corresponding to a given $i$. More precisely, I should say that $mathcal O_x$ is block-diagonal as it doesn't connect spaces with $ineq j$ on the first register, and each block is either the identity in the subspace in which it acts if $x_i=0$, or a permutation matrix that connects different pairs of basis states if $x_ineq 0$.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      3












      $begingroup$

      Notice that $mathcal O_x$ is a permutation matrix.



      The matrix elements are
      $$langle j, crvertmathcal O_xlvert i,brangle
      =delta_{ij}langle crvert boplus x_irangle
      =delta_{ij}delta_{c,boplus x_i}.$$
      In other words, $mathcal O_x$ is diagonal with respect to the first register, and, for each block corresponding to a given $i$, connects all and only the indices $b,c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (remember that here $b,c,x_iinmathbb Z_2^{otimes n}$ are length-$n$ bit strings).
      Also, notice that for a given $b$ there is no more than one $c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (more precisely, there isn't any such $c$ if $x_i=0$, and there is exactly one if $x_ineq 0$).



      It follows that $mathcal O_x$ is a (real) permutation matrix, and such matrices are always unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues (and therefore unitary).
      In this case, we have that the eigenvalues of $mathcal O_x$ are $pm1$, and the eigenvectors are, in the case $x_ineq 0$,
      $$lvert irangleotimes(lvert branglepmlvert boplus x_irangle)$$
      for all $i$ and $b$. If $x_i=0$ then $mathcal O_x$ is the identity, and therefore its spectrum is trivial${}^dagger$.



      This shows explicitly that $mathcal O_x$ is unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues, and therefore is unitary.




      ${}^dagger$ I'm actually being a bit sloppy for the sake of simplicity here. This analysis holds for each different block of $mathcal O_x$ corresponding to a given $i$. More precisely, I should say that $mathcal O_x$ is block-diagonal as it doesn't connect spaces with $ineq j$ on the first register, and each block is either the identity in the subspace in which it acts if $x_i=0$, or a permutation matrix that connects different pairs of basis states if $x_ineq 0$.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        3












        3








        3





        $begingroup$

        Notice that $mathcal O_x$ is a permutation matrix.



        The matrix elements are
        $$langle j, crvertmathcal O_xlvert i,brangle
        =delta_{ij}langle crvert boplus x_irangle
        =delta_{ij}delta_{c,boplus x_i}.$$
        In other words, $mathcal O_x$ is diagonal with respect to the first register, and, for each block corresponding to a given $i$, connects all and only the indices $b,c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (remember that here $b,c,x_iinmathbb Z_2^{otimes n}$ are length-$n$ bit strings).
        Also, notice that for a given $b$ there is no more than one $c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (more precisely, there isn't any such $c$ if $x_i=0$, and there is exactly one if $x_ineq 0$).



        It follows that $mathcal O_x$ is a (real) permutation matrix, and such matrices are always unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues (and therefore unitary).
        In this case, we have that the eigenvalues of $mathcal O_x$ are $pm1$, and the eigenvectors are, in the case $x_ineq 0$,
        $$lvert irangleotimes(lvert branglepmlvert boplus x_irangle)$$
        for all $i$ and $b$. If $x_i=0$ then $mathcal O_x$ is the identity, and therefore its spectrum is trivial${}^dagger$.



        This shows explicitly that $mathcal O_x$ is unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues, and therefore is unitary.




        ${}^dagger$ I'm actually being a bit sloppy for the sake of simplicity here. This analysis holds for each different block of $mathcal O_x$ corresponding to a given $i$. More precisely, I should say that $mathcal O_x$ is block-diagonal as it doesn't connect spaces with $ineq j$ on the first register, and each block is either the identity in the subspace in which it acts if $x_i=0$, or a permutation matrix that connects different pairs of basis states if $x_ineq 0$.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Notice that $mathcal O_x$ is a permutation matrix.



        The matrix elements are
        $$langle j, crvertmathcal O_xlvert i,brangle
        =delta_{ij}langle crvert boplus x_irangle
        =delta_{ij}delta_{c,boplus x_i}.$$
        In other words, $mathcal O_x$ is diagonal with respect to the first register, and, for each block corresponding to a given $i$, connects all and only the indices $b,c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (remember that here $b,c,x_iinmathbb Z_2^{otimes n}$ are length-$n$ bit strings).
        Also, notice that for a given $b$ there is no more than one $c$ such that $boplus c=x_i$ (more precisely, there isn't any such $c$ if $x_i=0$, and there is exactly one if $x_ineq 0$).



        It follows that $mathcal O_x$ is a (real) permutation matrix, and such matrices are always unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues (and therefore unitary).
        In this case, we have that the eigenvalues of $mathcal O_x$ are $pm1$, and the eigenvectors are, in the case $x_ineq 0$,
        $$lvert irangleotimes(lvert branglepmlvert boplus x_irangle)$$
        for all $i$ and $b$. If $x_i=0$ then $mathcal O_x$ is the identity, and therefore its spectrum is trivial${}^dagger$.



        This shows explicitly that $mathcal O_x$ is unitarily diagonalizable with unit eigenvalues, and therefore is unitary.




        ${}^dagger$ I'm actually being a bit sloppy for the sake of simplicity here. This analysis holds for each different block of $mathcal O_x$ corresponding to a given $i$. More precisely, I should say that $mathcal O_x$ is block-diagonal as it doesn't connect spaces with $ineq j$ on the first register, and each block is either the identity in the subspace in which it acts if $x_i=0$, or a permutation matrix that connects different pairs of basis states if $x_ineq 0$.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited Mar 26 at 18:05

























        answered Mar 26 at 17:49









        glSglS

        4,333740




        4,333740

























            7












            $begingroup$

            Apply it twice:
            $$
            O_xO_x|irangle|brangle=O_x|irangle|boplus x_irangle=|irangle|boplus x_ioplus x_irangle=|irangle|brangle
            $$
            Hence, $O_x$ is its own inverse, and therefore reversible.



            To prove unitarity, it makes more sense to prove that $O_x$ has eigenvectors
            $$
            |irangle(|0rangle+|1rangle)quadtext{and}quad|irangle(|0rangle-|1rangle)
            $$
            for all $i$ with eigenvalues $1$ and $(-1)^{x_i}$ respectively. These are all orthonormal, and span the full Hilbert space. Consequently, the eigenvalues of $O_x$ are all $pm 1$, and therefore $O_x^star=O_x$ (where $^star$ represents the Hermitian conjugate). Thus,
            $$
            O_xO_x^star=mathbb{I},
            $$
            as required for a unitary.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 13:56












            • $begingroup$
              One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 15:52












            • $begingroup$
              This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
              $endgroup$
              – Danylo Y
              Mar 26 at 16:17












            • $begingroup$
              I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – glS
              Mar 26 at 18:01








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
              $endgroup$
              – DaftWullie
              Mar 27 at 8:44
















            7












            $begingroup$

            Apply it twice:
            $$
            O_xO_x|irangle|brangle=O_x|irangle|boplus x_irangle=|irangle|boplus x_ioplus x_irangle=|irangle|brangle
            $$
            Hence, $O_x$ is its own inverse, and therefore reversible.



            To prove unitarity, it makes more sense to prove that $O_x$ has eigenvectors
            $$
            |irangle(|0rangle+|1rangle)quadtext{and}quad|irangle(|0rangle-|1rangle)
            $$
            for all $i$ with eigenvalues $1$ and $(-1)^{x_i}$ respectively. These are all orthonormal, and span the full Hilbert space. Consequently, the eigenvalues of $O_x$ are all $pm 1$, and therefore $O_x^star=O_x$ (where $^star$ represents the Hermitian conjugate). Thus,
            $$
            O_xO_x^star=mathbb{I},
            $$
            as required for a unitary.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 13:56












            • $begingroup$
              One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 15:52












            • $begingroup$
              This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
              $endgroup$
              – Danylo Y
              Mar 26 at 16:17












            • $begingroup$
              I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – glS
              Mar 26 at 18:01








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
              $endgroup$
              – DaftWullie
              Mar 27 at 8:44














            7












            7








            7





            $begingroup$

            Apply it twice:
            $$
            O_xO_x|irangle|brangle=O_x|irangle|boplus x_irangle=|irangle|boplus x_ioplus x_irangle=|irangle|brangle
            $$
            Hence, $O_x$ is its own inverse, and therefore reversible.



            To prove unitarity, it makes more sense to prove that $O_x$ has eigenvectors
            $$
            |irangle(|0rangle+|1rangle)quadtext{and}quad|irangle(|0rangle-|1rangle)
            $$
            for all $i$ with eigenvalues $1$ and $(-1)^{x_i}$ respectively. These are all orthonormal, and span the full Hilbert space. Consequently, the eigenvalues of $O_x$ are all $pm 1$, and therefore $O_x^star=O_x$ (where $^star$ represents the Hermitian conjugate). Thus,
            $$
            O_xO_x^star=mathbb{I},
            $$
            as required for a unitary.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Apply it twice:
            $$
            O_xO_x|irangle|brangle=O_x|irangle|boplus x_irangle=|irangle|boplus x_ioplus x_irangle=|irangle|brangle
            $$
            Hence, $O_x$ is its own inverse, and therefore reversible.



            To prove unitarity, it makes more sense to prove that $O_x$ has eigenvectors
            $$
            |irangle(|0rangle+|1rangle)quadtext{and}quad|irangle(|0rangle-|1rangle)
            $$
            for all $i$ with eigenvalues $1$ and $(-1)^{x_i}$ respectively. These are all orthonormal, and span the full Hilbert space. Consequently, the eigenvalues of $O_x$ are all $pm 1$, and therefore $O_x^star=O_x$ (where $^star$ represents the Hermitian conjugate). Thus,
            $$
            O_xO_x^star=mathbb{I},
            $$
            as required for a unitary.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Mar 27 at 8:51

























            answered Mar 26 at 12:18









            DaftWullieDaftWullie

            15.2k1542




            15.2k1542












            • $begingroup$
              Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 13:56












            • $begingroup$
              One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 15:52












            • $begingroup$
              This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
              $endgroup$
              – Danylo Y
              Mar 26 at 16:17












            • $begingroup$
              I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – glS
              Mar 26 at 18:01








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
              $endgroup$
              – DaftWullie
              Mar 27 at 8:44


















            • $begingroup$
              Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 13:56












            • $begingroup$
              One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
              $endgroup$
              – Divyat
              Mar 26 at 15:52












            • $begingroup$
              This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
              $endgroup$
              – Danylo Y
              Mar 26 at 16:17












            • $begingroup$
              I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
              $endgroup$
              – glS
              Mar 26 at 18:01








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
              $endgroup$
              – DaftWullie
              Mar 27 at 8:44
















            $begingroup$
            Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
            $endgroup$
            – Divyat
            Mar 26 at 13:56






            $begingroup$
            Thanks, I now understand $O_{x}$ is its own inverse but how does that make it unitary? For a unitary matrix, one would need to show that its inverse is equal to its conjugate transpose, $MM^{*}=I$. I think we further need to show $O_{x}$ is Hermitian, then it will be done.
            $endgroup$
            – Divyat
            Mar 26 at 13:56














            $begingroup$
            One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
            $endgroup$
            – Divyat
            Mar 26 at 15:52






            $begingroup$
            One more doubt, I think the answer still assumes that $O_{x}$ is normal matrix, as then with real eigenvalues we can claim it to be Hermitian. Please tell whether it is okay to assume oracle as normal or some justifications for it?
            $endgroup$
            – Divyat
            Mar 26 at 15:52














            $begingroup$
            This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
            $endgroup$
            – Danylo Y
            Mar 26 at 16:17






            $begingroup$
            This explanation is not quite correct, because you assumed that $O_x$ is diagonalizable, but it is not follow from $O_x^2=I$. The thing is $O_x$ maps basis vectors to basis vectors. Since $O_x^2=I$ then $Q_x$ is a permutation of basis vectors.
            $endgroup$
            – Danylo Y
            Mar 26 at 16:17














            $begingroup$
            I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
            $endgroup$
            – glS
            Mar 26 at 18:01






            $begingroup$
            I actually asked some time ago on math.SE whether one can deduce that $sqrt A$ is diagonalizable from the fact that $A$ is, see here. As far as I understood the answers, $A^2=I$ is not enough to imply that $A$ is unitarily diagonalizable, a counterexample being $begin{pmatrix}costheta & 2sintheta \ sintheta/2 & -costhetaend{pmatrix}$, which is a square root of the identity, but not (unitarily) diagonalizable, and not unitary, even though its eigenvalues are $pm 1$.
            $endgroup$
            – glS
            Mar 26 at 18:01






            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
            $endgroup$
            – DaftWullie
            Mar 27 at 8:44




            $begingroup$
            Fair enough, I was being a bit glib, particularly initially with regards to the difference between reversible and unitary, because usually its the reversibility aspect people are interested in.
            $endgroup$
            – DaftWullie
            Mar 27 at 8:44










            Divyat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Divyat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Divyat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Divyat is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Quantum Computing Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fquantumcomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f5779%2fhow-to-prove-that-the-query-oracle-is-unitary%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            Plaza Victoria

            Image
            Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l...
            Read more

            Puebla de Zaragoza

            Image
            Para otros usos de este término, véase Puebla (desambiguación). Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localidad De arriba a abajo de izquierda a derecha: Estrella de Puebla, Volcán Popocatépetl, Catedral de Puebla, Monumento a Ignacio Zaragoza, Estadio Cuauhtémoc, Angelópolis y Vista panorámica de la ciudad. Escudo Otros nombres: El relicario de América/ La ciudad de los Ángeles/ La Angelópolis Lema: Muy noble y muy leal ciudad de Puebla de los Ángeles Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en México Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en Puebla Mapa interactivo Coordenadas 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Coordenadas: 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Idioma oficial Español Entidad Localidad  • País   México  • Estado Puebla  • Municipio Puebla Presidente municipal Claudia Rivera Vivanc...
            Read more

            Musa

            Image
            Para el género de plantas, véase Musa (planta). Apolo y la Nueve Musas En la mitología griega, las musas (en griego antiguo μοῦσαι « mousai» ) son, según los escritores más antiguos, las divinidades inspiradoras de las Artes: cada una de ellas está relacionada con ramas artísticas y del conocimiento. Son hijas de Zeus y de Mnemósine, compañeras del séquito de Apolo, dios olímpico de la música y patrón de las bellas artes, quien tuvo romances con cada una de ellas, dejando descendientes. Bajaban a la tierra a susurrar ideas e inspirar a aquellos mortales que las invocaran. En la época más arcaica eran las ninfas inspiradoras de las fuentes, en las cuales eran adoradas. Finalmente, alrededor de los siglos VIII-VII a. C. [ 1 ] ​ prevaleció en todo el territorio de la Hélade la adoración de las nueve Musas, que son Calíope, Clío, Erato, Euterpe, Melpómene, Polimnia, Talía, Terpsícore y Urania. El culto a las musas era originalmente de Tracia y Beocia, y fueron de vital impo...
            Read more