Quantum Circuits for the Unitary Permutation Problem

We consider the Unitary Permutation problem which consists, given $n$ unitary gates $U_1, \ldots, U_n$ and a permutation $\sigma$ of $\{1,\ldots, n\}$, in applying the unitary gates in the order specified by $\sigma$, i.e. in performing $U_{\sigma(n)}\ldots U_{\sigma(1)}$. This problem has been introduced and investigated by Colnaghi et al. where two models of computations are considered. This first is the (standard) model of query complexity: the complexity measure is the number of calls to any of the unitary gates $U_i$ in a quantum circuit which solves the problem. The second model provides quantum switches and treats unitary transformations as inputs of second order. In that case the complexity measure is the number of quantum switches. In their paper, Colnaghi et al. have shown that the problem can be solved within $n^2$ calls in the query model and $\frac{n(n-1)}2$ quantum switches in the new model. We refine these results by proving that $n\log_2(n) +\Theta(n)$ quantum switches are necessary and sufficient to solve this problem, whereas $n^2-2n+4$ calls are sufficient to solve this problem in the standard quantum circuit model. We prove, with an additional assumption on the family of gates used in the circuits, that $n^2-o(n^{7/4+\epsilon})$ queries are required, for any $\epsilon >0$. The upper and lower bounds for the standard quantum circuit model are established by pointing out connections with the permutation as substring problem introduced by Karp.Comment: 8 pages, 5 figure

A Classical Sequential Growth Dynamics for Causal Sets

Starting from certain causality conditions and a discrete form of general covariance, we derive a very general family of classically stochastic, sequential growth dynamics for causal sets. The resulting theories provide a relatively accessible ``half way house'' to full quantum gravity that possibly contains the latter's classical limit (general relativity). Because they can be expressed in terms of state models for an assembly of Ising spins living on the relations of the causal set, these theories also illustrate how non-gravitational matter can arise dynamically from the causal set without having to be built in at the fundamental level. Additionally, our results bring into focus some interpretive issues of importance for causal set dynamics, and for quantum gravity more generally.Comment: 28 pages, 9 figures, LaTeX, added references and a footnote, minor correction

Small ball probability, Inverse theorems, and applications

Let $\xi$ be a real random variable with mean zero and variance one and $A={a_1,...,a_n}$ be a multi-set in $\R^d$. The random sum $$S_A := a_1 \xi_1 + ... + a_n \xi_n$$ where $\xi_i$ are iid copies of $\xi$ is of fundamental importance in probability and its applications. We discuss the small ball problem, the aim of which is to estimate the maximum probability that $S_A$ belongs to a ball with given small radius, following the discovery made by Littlewood-Offord and Erdos almost 70 years ago. We will mainly focus on recent developments that characterize the structure of those sets $A$ where the small ball probability is relatively large. Applications of these results include full solutions or significant progresses of many open problems in different areas.Comment: 47 page

Partial Covering Arrays: Algorithms and Asymptotics

A covering array $\mathsf{CA}(N;t,k,v)$ is an $N\times k$ array with entries in $\{1, 2, \ldots , v\}$, for which every $N\times t$ subarray contains each $t$-tuple of $\{1, 2, \ldots , v\}^t$ among its rows. Covering arrays find application in interaction testing, including software and hardware testing, advanced materials development, and biological systems. A central question is to determine or bound $\mathsf{CAN}(t,k,v)$, the minimum number $N$ of rows of a $\mathsf{CA}(N;t,k,v)$. The well known bound $\mathsf{CAN}(t,k,v)=O((t-1)v^t\log k)$ is not too far from being asymptotically optimal. Sensible relaxations of the covering requirement arise when (1) the set $\{1, 2, \ldots , v\}^t$ need only be contained among the rows of at least $(1-\epsilon)\binom{k}{t}$ of the $N\times t$ subarrays and (2) the rows of every $N\times t$ subarray need only contain a (large) subset of $\{1, 2, \ldots , v\}^t$. In this paper, using probabilistic methods, significant improvements on the covering array upper bound are established for both relaxations, and for the conjunction of the two. In each case, a randomized algorithm constructs such arrays in expected polynomial time

High degree graphs contain large-star factors

We show that any finite simple graph with minimum degree $d$ contains a spanning star forest in which every connected component is of size at least $\Omega((d/\log d)^{1/3})$. This settles a problem of J. Kratochvil

Maximum union-free subfamilies

An old problem of Moser asks: how large of a union-free subfamily does every family of m sets have? A family of sets is called union-free if there are no three distinct sets in the family such that the union of two of the sets is equal to the third set. We show that every family of m sets contains a union-free subfamily of size at least \lfloor \sqrt{4m+1}\rfloor - 1 and that this bound is tight. This solves Moser's problem and proves a conjecture of Erd\H{o}s and Shelah from 1972. More generally, a family of sets is a-union-free if there are no a+1 distinct sets in the family such that one of them is equal to the union of a others. We determine up to an absolute multiplicative constant factor the size of the largest guaranteed a-union-free subfamily of a family of m sets. Our result verifies in a strong form a conjecture of Barat, F\"{u}redi, Kantor, Kim and Patkos.Comment: 10 page

Experimental Treatments for Spinal Cord Injury: What you Should Know

Experiencing a spinal cord injury (SCI) is extremely distressing, both physically and psychologically, and throws people into a complex, unfamiliar world of medical procedures, terminology, and decision making. You may have already had surgery to stabilize the spinal column and reduce the possibility of further damage. You are understandably distressed about the functions you may have lost below the level of spinal injury. You wish to recover any lost abilities as soon as possible. You, your family, or friends may have searched the Internet for treatments and cures