Can Optimal Control Be Achieved Using Direct Cost Function Calculation?

Kreizhn
Messages
714
Reaction score
1
Hey everyone,

I have a hypothesis that I would like to confirm. I won't bore anyone with the nitty gritty details, so I will try to be as general as possible.

I'm doing a project on gradient ascent methods and their application to quantum control. The quantum part isn't important as my question is mathematical in nature, though a small caveat will appear and I'll make that clear.

Essentially, I'm trying to find an optimal control that will drive an operator \rho(t), \rho(0) =\rho_0 to an operator \tau in time T such that it optimizes their mutual inner product, say
C = \langle \tau , \rho(T) \rangle [/itex]<br /> The gradient ascent method says that we should find the gradient of C, and then proceed in the direction in which the gradient is maximal. This is very useful from a numerical standpoint, and that is the context with which I will be using it.<br /> <br /> I was asked during a seminar whether, in the event that we could directly calculate C, there was any way of formulating an optimal control just using the value of C, and if this could be potentially more efficient. Incidentally, this is where the quantum caveat occurs, in that there&#039;s no guarantee we can calculate C.<br /> <br /> Thus my question comes down to this. Under the assumption that we can calculate the cost function directly, can I then find an algorithm to optimize my control variables?<br /> <br /> I suspect not, since the inner product <i>naively</i> represents the overlap of the two operators. Hence calculating the cost function may tell us how close we are to a solution, but in an iterative numerical process, does not tell us &quot;in which direction&quot; to update our control variables.<br /> <br /> Any thoughts on this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I cannot see any changes in ##C##. If ##\rho## and ##\tau## are given, so is their angle ##C##. As I understand it, the control operator represents a path from ##\rho## and ##\tau## within the operator space, say ##\gamma(s)\,.## Thus you get angles ##C(s)=\langle \rho, \gamma(s) \rangle## which you could optimize.

However, a more specific answer depends on a more specific description.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top