DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specification, page 16, line 31 refers to Fig 2a, there is not a 2a figure.
Specification, page 24 refers to Figures 65-10, there is no figure 65.
Figure 5 is not identified as being described within the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 has been amended to be dependent on claim 1, (claim 1 is a system claim), however claim 17 is a method claim previously dependent on claim 11 (a method claim). Examiner will review as if claim 17 is dependent on method claim 11. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Regarding claims 1, 11, 32 (multiple occurrences) and 7, the phrase "its" renders the claim(s) indefinite as being unclear which item “its” is referring back to, thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 11-14, 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), (a)(2) as being anticipated by Tajima et al., (US Publication No. 2008/0013738), hereinafter “Tajima”.
Regarding claim 1, Tajima discloses
a quantum computing system having a modular architecture, the quantum computing system comprising:
one or more quantum computing devices, one or more classical computing devices [Tajima, Abstract, paragraph 49, figure 1], and
a plurality of units, each unit comprising an input interface and an output interface, and having each unit being of a type selected from a controller unit, a quantum processing unit and a classical processing unit [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49, 54, figures 1-2];
wherein each quantum processing unit: comprises a data converter [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-54, figures 1-2];
is configured to connect to one of the one or more quantum computing devices [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-2];
is configured to pass data received at its input interface to its data converter and pass an output of its data converter to its connected quantum computing device [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-54, figures 1-2];
is configured to pass data received from its connected quantum computing device to its data converter and pass an output of its data converter to its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-54, figures 1-2];
wherein: each of the output interface and the input interface of each quantum processing unit is configured to connect to other units of the quantum computing system [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-54, figures 1-2]; and
wherein each classical processing unit: is configured to execute a stateless arithmetic function on an input received at its input interface and to output a result of executing the stateless arithmetic function at its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-54, figures 1-2]; and
is configured to execute its stateless arithmetic function on one of the one or more classical computing device [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-54, figures 1-2]; and
wherein each controller unit: is configured to execute control logic associated with the modular architecture [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
is configured to connect to one or more other units of the quantum computing system through its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
is configured to direct operation of its connected one or more units [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claims 2, 12, Tajima further discloses
wherein the data converter of each quantum processing unit is configured to transform the data received via the quantum processing unit's input interface into instructions to manipulate the quantum computing device [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claims 3, 13, Tajima further discloses
wherein the output interface of each classical processing unit is configured to output data to one or more of: other units of the quantum computing system, a display, or a data storage system [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claims 4, 14, Tajima further discloses
wherein the quantum computing system implements a stateful algorithm having a state, and wherein each controller unit is connected to a memory and is configured to save the state information of the algorithm in the memory [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claim 7, Tajima further discloses
wherein each quantum processing unit is configured to connect to its connected quantum computing device via a network and is configured to execute instructions to control the quantum computing device [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claim 11, Tajima further discloses
a quantum computing method comprising:
providing one or more quantum computing devices, and a plurality of units, each unit being of a type, selected from a controller unit type, a quantum processing unit type, and a classical processing unit type, each unit having an input interface and an output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
- implementing a quantum computing algorithm by forming connections between input and output interfaces of the plurality of units [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
in each quantum processing unit: converting input data received at its input [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
causing one of the one or more quantum computing devices to produce an output based on the converted input data [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
converting the output of the quantum computing device [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
outputting the converted output via its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
in each classical processing unit: executing a stateless arithmetic function on an input received at its input interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
outputting the result of executing the stateless arithmetic function at its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
- executing the quantum computing algorithm by directing operation of the one or more of the quantum processing units and one or more of the classical processing units by one or more of the controller units [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claim 32, Tajima further discloses
a computer program product, comprising
a computer usable medium having a computer readable program code embodied therein for performing a quantum computing method, including;
computer readable program code configured to initialize a plurality of units, each unit comprising an input interface and an output interface, each unit being of a type selected from a controller unit, a quantum processing unit and a classical processing unit [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
wherein each quantum processing unit:
comprises a data converter [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
is configured to connect to one of the one or more quantum computing devices; is configured to pass data received at its input interface to its data converter and pass an output of its data converter to a connected quantum computing device [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
is configured to pass data received from its connected quantum computing device to its data converter and pass an output of its data converter to its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
wherein: each of the output interface and the input interface of each quantum processing unit is configured to connect to other units of the quantum computing system [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
wherein each classical processing unit: is configured to execute a stateless arithmetic function on an input received at its input interface and to output a result of executing the stateless arithmetic function at its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
is configured to execute its stateless arithmetic function on a classical computing device[Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
wherein each controller unit: is configured to execute control logic associated with the modular architecture [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
is configured to connect to one or more other units of the quantum computing system through its output interface [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
is configured to direct operation of its connected one or more units [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima, and further in view of Chaplin et al., (US Publication No. 2020/0272926), hereinafter “Chaplin”.
Regarding claim 22, Tajima discloses
a quantum computing method comprising:
receiving an algorithm definition, the algorithm definition comprising a plurality of classical processes and a plurality of quantum processes and defining a data flow therebetween, the algorithm being stateful [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
Tajima does not specifically disclose, however Chaplin teaches
generating a directed acyclic graph representation and associated control flow from the algorithm definition [Chaplin, Abstract, paragraphs 37-38, 76, 79-86, figure 5], whereby processes are defined by nodes of the graph and data flow is defined by edges of the graph between nodes and the classical and quantum processes are stateless and executed independently and under the control of the control flow [Chaplin, Abstract, paragraphs 37-38, 76, 79-86, figure 5].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an acyclic graph representation whereby processes are defined by nodes of the graph in order to provide a secure environment for the quantum / classical computing environments. It would have been obvious to combine Chaplin with Tajima as both arts relate to a similar concept.
Regarding claim 23, Tajima-Chaplin further discloses
instantiating classical processing resources to execute the classical processes, and instantiating quantum processing resources to execute the quantum processes [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
passing data to the instantiated resources to execute the processes in accordance with the control flow [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3];
receiving output from the instantiated resource [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and,
storing the state of the algorithm based on the received output [Chaplin, Abstract, paragraphs 37-38, 76, 79-86, figure 5].
Claim(s) 6, 8-10, 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shi et al., (US Publication No. 2015/0199178), hereinafter “Shi”.
Regarding claims 6, 16, Tajima does not specifically disclose, however Shi teaches
wherein one or more of the units of the quantum computing system comprises a field programmable gate array, FPGA [Shi, paragraph 181].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a FPGA in order to provide for the security for special purpose items. It would have been obvious to combine Shi with Tajima as both arts relate to similar concepts.
Regarding claims 8, 17, Tajima-Shi further discloses
wherein the plurality of units of the quantum computing system has a configuration, the quantum computing system further comprising
a processor configured to execute computer program code to provide a user interface, and wherein the user interface [Shi, paragraph 110] being is configured:
to provide an abstract representation of the configuration of the plurality of units of the quantum computing system [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3]; and
to receive user inputs to define or modify one or more of a number of the units, a type of each unit, arrangement of the units, connections to each unit's input interface, and, connections from each unit's output interface [Shi, paragraphs 107, 110].
Regarding claims 9, 18, Tajima-Shi further discloses
provision and link the plurality of units in accordance with the abstract representation [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claims 10, 19, Tajima-Shi further discloses
a data repository defining architecture blocks, each architecture block comprising two or more pre-connected units of the quantum computing system [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3],
wherein the user interface is configured to receive a user input [Shi, paragraphs 47, 107, 110] selecting one of the architecture blocks, and to insert the pre-connected units of the selected architecture block into the abstract representation of the configuration of the plurality of units of the quantum computing system [Tajima, Abstract, paragraphs 49-56, figures 1-3].
Regarding claim 15, Tajima-Shi further discloses
providing a classical computing device [Shi, paragraphs 47, 107, 110, figures 1, 2A-2D]; and
simulating at least one unit on the classical computing device [Shi, paragraphs 47, 107, 110, figures 1, 2A-2D].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25, 30-31 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J GOODCHILD whose telephone number is (571)270-1589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff Pwu can be reached at 571-272-6798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/William J. Goodchild/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433