Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This office action is in response to the original filing of 11/21/2022. Claim 1-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract ideas without significantly more.
Claim 1:
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites following abstract ideas:
“preparing an initial state of the quantum system;” under broadest reasonable interpretation covers a mental process including an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion that could be performed in the human mind or with the aid of pencil and paper.
“performing an n-step evolution and post-processing operation on the quantum system, wherein n is a first positive integer, the n-step evolution and post-processing operations includes one or more steps that increase a proportion of the ground state in one or more output states of the one or more steps step by step”; Mathematical Calculations a claim that recites a mathematical calculation, when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification ([0040]), will be considered as falling within the "mathematical concepts" grouping. A mathematical calculation is a mathematical operation (such as multiplication) or an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, e.g., performing an arithmetic operation such as exponentiation. There is no particular word or set of words that indicates a claim recites a mathematical calculation. That is, a claim does not have to recite the word "calculating" in order to be considered a mathematical calculation.
Step 2A Prong 2: The following limitations recite additional elements:
“obtaining an output quantum state in an n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation”; “and determining the ground state of the quantum system based on the output quantum state in the n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation.” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Step 2B: Furthermore, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As previously discussed, the additional elements
“obtaining an output quantum state in an n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation”; “and determining the ground state of the quantum system based on the output quantum state in the n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation.” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 11:
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites following abstract ideas:
“prepare an initial state of the quantum system;” under broadest reasonable interpretation covers a mental process including an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion that could be performed in the human mind or with the aid of pencil and paper.
“perform an n-step evolution and post-processing operation on the quantum system, wherein n is a first positive integer, the n-step evolution and post-processing operations includes one or more steps that increase a proportion of the ground state in one or more output states of the one or more steps step by step”; Mathematical Calculations a claim that recites a mathematical calculation, when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification ([0040]), will be considered as falling within the "mathematical concepts" grouping. A mathematical calculation is a mathematical operation (such as multiplication) or an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, e.g., performing an arithmetic operation such as exponentiation. There is no particular word or set of words that indicates a claim recites a mathematical calculation. That is, a claim does not have to recite the word "calculating" in order to be considered a mathematical calculation.
Step 2A Prong 2: The following limitations recite additional elements:
“obtain an output quantum state in an n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation”; “and determine the ground state of the quantum system based on the output quantum state in the n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation.” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“processing circuitry…” amount to elements that have been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional activity in particular fields, as demonstrate by: Relevant court decision: the followings are examples of court decisions demonstrating well-understood, routine and conventional activities, see e.g., MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) and MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Computer readable storage media comprising instructions to implement a method, e.g., see Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Step 2B: Furthermore, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As previously discussed, the additional elements
“obtain an output quantum state in an n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation”; “and determine the ground state of the quantum system based on the output quantum state in the n.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation.” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“processing circuitry…” amount to elements that have been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional activity in particular fields, as demonstrate by: Relevant court decision: the followings are examples of court decisions demonstrating well-understood, routine and conventional activities, see e.g., MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) and MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Computer readable storage media comprising instructions to implement a method, e.g., see Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Claim 20:
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim recites following abstract ideas:
“setting the trial quantum state constructed by using the variational quantum circuit as a ground state of the quantum system in response to the one or more parameters of the variational quantum circuit meeting a stop optimization condition” and “determining an energy expectation value of a Hamiltonian of the quantum system under the trial quantum state as a ground state energy of the quantum system” Mathematical Calculations a claim that recites a mathematical calculation, when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification ([0137]), will be considered as falling within the "mathematical concepts" grouping. A mathematical calculation is a mathematical operation (such as multiplication) or an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, e.g., performing an arithmetic operation such as exponentiation. There is no particular word or set of words that indicates a claim recites a mathematical calculation. That is, a claim does not have to recite the word "calculating" in order to be considered a mathematical calculation.
Step 2A Prong 2: The following limitations recite additional elements:
“using a variational quantum circuit to construct a trial quantum state”; “adjusting one or more parameters of the variational quantum circuit to cause the trial quantum state to approach a target quantum state of the quantum system” amount to mere instruction to apply.
Step 2B: Furthermore, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As previously discussed, the additional elements
“using a variational quantum circuit to construct a trial quantum state”; “adjusting one or more parameters of the variational quantum circuit to cause the trial quantum state to approach a target quantum state of the quantum system” amount to mere instruction to apply.
Claim 2 recites “wherein: the n-step evolution and post-processing operation comprises n steps in a sequence with an evolution and a post-processing in respective steps, a k.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation comprises a k.sup.th evolution and a k.sup.th post-processing, the k.sup.th evolution performs evolution on an input quantum state of the k.sup.th Step to obtain a final state of the k.sup.th evolution, the k.sup.th post-processing removes an influence of an auxiliary qubit used in the k.sup.th evolution from the final state of the k.sup.th evolution to obtain an output quantum state of the k.sup.th step, k is a second positive integer that is less than or equal to n.” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)). Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93’
Claim 3 recites “wherein: when k is larger than 1, the input quantum state in the k.sup.th step comprises a Cartesian product of an output quantum state of a (k−1).sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation and an initial state of the auxiliary qubit used in the k.sup.th evolution; and when k is equal to 1, an input quantum state in a first step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation comprises a Cartesian product of the initial state of the quantum system and an initial state of an auxiliary qubit used in a first evolution of the first step” amount to Mathematical Calculations or concept.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the performing the n-step evolution and post-processing operation on the quantum system comprises: performing the k.sup.th evolution by using a k.sup.th quantum circuit, to obtain the final state of the k.sup.th evolution.” amount to mathematical calculations.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the performing the n-step evolution and post-processing operation on the quantum system comprises: performing the k.sup.th post-processing by using a k.sup.th measuring circuit, and the k.sup.th post-processing projecting the auxiliary qubit used in the k.sup.th evolution to a 0 state, to obtain the output quantum state of the k.sup.th step.” amount to mathematical calculations.
Claim 6 recites “wherein an auxiliary qubit is reused in each evolution in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation.” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 7 recites “wherein at least an m.sup.th step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation comprises an m.sup.th variational quantum circuit corresponding to an m.sup.th evolution of the m.sup.th step, m is a positive integer equal or smaller than n, the method comprises: “performing an m.sup.th transformation on a final state of the m.sup.th evolution by using the m.sup.th variational quantum circuit corresponding to the m.sup.th evolution, to obtain a transformed quantum state of the m.sup.th step;” amount to mathematical calculation; “adjusting one or more parameters of the m.sup.th variational quantum circuit corresponding to the m.sup.th evolution to minimize an energy expectation value of the transformed quantum state of the m.sup.th step” amount to mere instruction to apply;
“obtaining, in response to the one or more parameters of the m.sup.th variational quantum circuit corresponding to the m.sup.th step of evolution meeting a stop optimization condition, the transformed quantum state after the m.sup.th transformation” amount to insignificant extra solution activity like mere data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g)); and “performing an m.sup.th post-processing on the transformed quantum state after the m.sup.th transformation, to obtain the output quantum state of the m.sup.th step” amount to mathematical calculation.
Claim 8 recites “wherein each step in the n-step evolution and post-processing operation is performed by a variational quantum circuit corresponding to an evolution of the step” amount to mere instruction to apply.
Claim 9 recites “during the adjusting the one or more parameters of the m.sup.th variational quantum circuit corresponding to the m.sup.th evolution of the m.sup.th step, keeping parameters of other variational quantum circuits of other steps unchanged” amount to mere instruction to apply.
Claim 10 recites “adjusting, after the adjusting the one or more parameters of the m.sup.th variational quantum circuit corresponding to the m.sup.th evolution, parameters of another variational quantum circuit in another step of the n-step evolution and post-processing operation” amount to mere instruction to apply.
Claims 12-19 are similar in scope as claims 2-10, respectively; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (See PTO-892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Phenuel S. Salomon whose telephone number is (571) 270-1699. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 7:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. (Alternate Friday Off) EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Usmaan Saeed can be reached on (571) 272-4046. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-3800.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHENUEL S SALOMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2146
Prosecution Insights