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. Claim Interpretation Exemplary claim 1 recites “a plurality of codewords associated with a set of codewords, each codeword comprising a plurality of symbols associated with a symbol constellation” in its preamble. Let a symbol be C m S n with (m & n) ∈ ℕ , a codeword be C m = {C m S 1 , C m S 2 , … C m S M } with M M≥2 . Examiner will contemplate interpreting a “plurality of codewords” and “set of codewords” as C = {C 1 , C 2 , …C N } with N≥2. Examiner will contemplate interpreting a “plurality of codewords” and “a plurality of symbols” and “symbol constellation” as C m = {C m S 1 , C m S 2 , … C m S M }. 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 of this title, 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1- 4 , 10 , 12-13 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saikat Guha [US 20120177385 A1] in view of Li-Bing Chen [Efficient Nonlocal M-Control and N-Target Controlled Unitary Gate Using Non-symmetric GHZ States] and further in view of Nissim Ofek et al. [US 20190049495 A1]. Regarding claim 1, Saikat teaches: 1. A method for processing a signal comprising a plurality of codewords associated with a set of codewords, each codeword comprising a plurality of symbols associated with a symbol constellation (i.e. An optical receiver may include a unitary transformation operator to receive an n-symbol optical codeword associated with a codebook, and to perform a unitary transformation on the received optical codeword to generate a transformed optical codeword, where the unitary transformation is based on the codebook. The optical receiver may further include n optical detectors, where a particular one of the n optical detectors is to detect a particular optical symbol of the transformed optical codeword, and to determine whether the particular optical symbol corresponds to a first optical symbol or a second optical symbol. The optical receiver may also include a decoder to construct a codeword based on the determinations, and to decode the constructed codeword into a message using the codebook. The optical receiver may attain superadditive capacity, and, with an optimal code, may attain the Holevo limit to reliable communication data rates- Abstract… A structure of the unitary transformation operator may be based on the codebook used to encode the codewords received by the receiver- ¶0027) , the method comprising: mapping quantum states associated with symbols (i.e. superpositions of quantum states- ¶0025) of a particular codeword (i.e. an optical codeword of n symbols- ¶0025) of the signal to a plurality of input (i.e. linear combinations of |+a and |-a (e.g., superpositions of |+a and |-a)) qubits (i.e. An implementation described herein may relate to approaching a Holevo limit by performing a projective measurement. A projective measurement may be implemented by performing a unitary transformation on a quantum codeword, which may transform quantum states associated with symbols of the quantum codeword into superpositions of quantum states, followed by separable projective measurements. A unitary transformation on an optical codeword of n symbols may correspond to a lossless transformation on the quantum state of the n symbols. In other words, a unitary transformation on an optical codeword in a vector space may correspond to a transformation that preserves an inner product - ¶0025… the transformed optical codeword may correspond to states which may not be pure BPSK symbols |+a and |-a, but rather may correspond to linear combinations of |+a and |-a (e.g., superpositions of |+a and |-a)- ¶0045) ; and applying quantum operations to the input qubits according to a quantum circuit for decoding the signal (i.e. Dolinar receiver 420 may convert the received optical symbol into an electrical signal corresponding to an estimate of whether the received optical symbol, of the transformed optical codeword, corresponds to a |+a symbol or a |-a symbol. Dolinar receiver 420 is described below in more detail with reference to FIG. 5- ¶0046… Decoder 430 may receive electrical signals from Dolinar receivers 420 and may combine the received electrical signals into an estimate of an n-bit particular codeword of the codebook. Decoder 430 may then use a 1-1 map to generate an estimate of k-bit message 310 corresponding to the n-bit estimated codeword- ¶0047) . However, Saikat does not teach explicitly: wherein the quantum operations comprise: a plurality of controlled unitary multi-qubit operations performed on two or more qubits in a first set of qubits controlled based on two or more qubits in a second set of qubits, In the same field of endeavor, Li-Bing teaches: wherein the quantum operations comprise: a plurality of controlled unitary multi-qubit operations (i.e. A key controlled unitary gate in QC is the M-control and N-target controlled unitary gate (here dubbed (M + N)-qubit controlled gate). Suppose {U i ; i = 1, 2, . . . , N} is a set of arbitrary single-qubit unitary gates- page 707, ¶3) performed on two or more qubits in a first set of qubits (i.e. N target qubits {T n ; n = 1, . . . , N}, and performs respectively the given unitary gates U 1 , . . . , U N on individual target qubits T 1 , . . . , T N if and only if all the control qubits are |1 , i.e., x C1 · · · x CM = 1, with {x Cm , y Tn = 0, 1; m = 1, · · · ,M; n = 0, · · · ,N}. This (M + N)-qubit controlled gate C (M) C1···CM T (N) T ···T N (U 1 , · · ·U N ) may be constructed by concatenatingN M-control and single-target controlled unitary gate C(M) C1···CM T (1) Tn (Un) (here dubbed (M+1)-qubit controlled gate)- page 707, ¶3) controlled based on two or more qubits in a second set of qubits (i.e. M control qubits {C m ;m = 1, · · · ,M}- page 707, ¶3) , It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat with the teachings of Li-Bing to more efficiently implement nonlocal multi-party gate (Li-Bing- page 708, ¶4). However, Saikat Li-Bing do not teach explicitly: an initial quantum measurement performed on an initially measured qubit in the first set of qubits, at least one controlled unitary single-qubit operation performed on a post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit, and a plurality of quantum operations that invert at least a portion of the operations in the plurality of controlled unitary multi-qubit operations. In the same field of endeavor, Nissim teaches: an initial quantum measurement performed on an initially measured qubit in the first set of qubits, at least one controlled unitary single-qubit operation performed on a post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit (i.e. encoding (a unitary swap operation) of the qubit state - ¶0329) , and a plurality of quantum operations that invert (i.e. decoding (a unitary swap operation) the received cavity state to the qubit B resulting in al α |e b +β |g B , corresponding to a transfer of the qubit state between the qubits- ¶0239) at least a portion of the operations in the plurality of controlled unitary multi-qubit operations (i.e. The illustrative scenario of FIGS. 31A-31B comprises initializing the qubit A into a superposition of the ground and excited state α |e A +β |g A , encoding (a unitary swap operation) of the qubit state into the logical codewords of the send cavity αW ↑ s +βW ↓ s , using one of the binomial codes, letting the cavity state leak in a time-reversal symmetric manner (pitch) into a transmission line or to other kind of a flying oscillator αW ↑ F +βW ↓ F such that the inverse process (catch) is most efficient into the receiving cavity αW ↑ F +βW ↓ F The transfer is finalized by decoding (a unitary swap operation) the received cavity state to the qubit B resulting in al α |e b +β |g B , corresponding to a transfer of the qubit state between the qubits. The remote physical qubits can be entangled by replacing the first swap with a CNOT-gate between the physical qubit A and logical qubit of the cavity- ¶0329) It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat and Li-Bing with the teachings of Nissim to improve quantum error correction technique for correcting errors in the state of a quantum system exhibiting one or more bosonic mode (Nissim- ¶0249) . Regarding claim 2, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1. However, Saika does not teach explicitly: wherein the controlled unitary single-qubit operation performed on the post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit is controlled based on at least two of the qubits in the second set of qubits. In the same field of endeavor, Li-Bing teaches: wherein the controlled unitary single-qubit operation performed on the post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit is controlled based on at least two of the qubits in the second set of qubits (i.e. single-target controlled unitary gate C(M) C1···CM T (1) Tn (Un) (here dubbed (M+1)-qubit controlled gate)- page 707, ¶3) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat with the teachings of Li-Bing to more efficiently implement nonlocal multi-party gate (Li-Bing- page 708, ¶4). Regarding claim 3, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 2. However, Saikat and Li-Bing do not teach explicitly: wherein the controlled unitary single-qubit operation applies one of two potential rotations that is determined based at least in part on a result of the initial quantum measurement. In the same field of endeavor, Nissim teaches: wherein the controlled unitary single-qubit operation applies one of two potential rotations that is determined based at least in part on a result of the initial quantum measurement (i.e. with pre- and post-rotations of the qubit yields- ¶0039) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat and Li-Bing with the teachings of Nissim to improve quantum error correction technique for correcting errors in the state of a quantum system exhibiting one or more bosonic mode (Nissim- ¶0249) . Regarding claim 4, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 2. However, Saikat and Li-Bing do not teach explicitly: wherein the plurality of quantum operations that invert at least a portion of the operations in the plurality of controlled unitary multi-qubit operations operate on a result of the controlled unitary single-qubit operation. In the same field of endeavor, Nissim teaches: wherein the plurality of quantum operations that invert at least a portion of the operations in the plurality of controlled unitary multi-qubit operations (i.e. The inverse process (catch) is most efficient into the receiving cavity- ¶0239) operate on a result of the controlled unitary single-qubit operation (i.e. We consider here an illustative task, namely the ‘pitch-and-catch’ scenario for a quantum state, schematized in FIGS. 31A-31B. FIG. 31A is a sketch of a circuit QED hardware proposal and FIG. 31B is a schematic of a quantum state transfer scenario utilizing encoding and quantum error correction of the binomial quantum states. In the example of FIGS. 31A-31B, after encoding the qubit state to the send cavity, by controlling the cavity decay one can tailor a temporal mode for the flying, traveling oscillator mode that is fully absorbed by the receiving cavity. The received cavity state may have suffered from photon loss errors (Eqn. B14), dephasing and photon gain errors that can be recovered by performing the recovery process before decoding it to the physical qubit.- ¶0328) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat and Li-Bing with the teachings of Nissim to improve quantum error correction technique for correcting errors in the state of a quantum system exhibiting one or more bosonic mode (Nissim- ¶0249) . Regarding claim 10, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1. However, Saika and Li-Bing do not teach explicitly: wherein the initial quantum measurement comprises a quantum nondemolition measurement that determines information from the initially measured qubit and propagates the post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit after the quantum nondemolition measurement. In the same field of endeavor, Nissim teaches: wherein the initial quantum measurement comprises a quantum nondemolition measurement that determines information from the initially measured qubit and propagates the post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit after the quantum nondemolition measurement (i.e. According to some embodiments, a detector may be configured to monitor the bosonic system to detect when an error occurs. It is a feature of the binomial codes described herein that such a detector may be able to detect whether any error occurred, and also detect which type of error occurred, whilst preserving the state of the bosonic system. This type of measurement is sometimes referred to as a quantum nondemolition measurement (QND)- ¶0261… In some embodiments, a suitable device architecture may include a multi-level quantum system, such as a transmon or other nonlinear quantum system, dispersively coupled to two qubits each implemented as a quantum mechanical oscillator. The oscillators may be, for example, resonator cavities or other suitable linear quantum oscillators. The multi-level quantum system may be used as an ancilla to create, manipulate, and/or to measure the quantum states of each of the oscillators to which it is coupled. By accessing multiple energy levels of the ancilla, the techniques described herein make it possible to realize universal quantum control of the two qubits and to monitor the error syndrome of the two qubits by performing quantum non-demolition (QND) measurement- ¶0345… The error syndrome of the two-mode cat state may therefore be monitored by performing quantum non-demolition (QND) measurements of the cat state- ¶0352) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat and Li-Bing with the teachings of Nissim to improve quantum error correction technique for correcting errors in the state of a quantum system exhibiting one or more bosonic mode (Nissim- ¶0249) . Regarding claim 12, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Saikat teaches: wherein all of the input qubits mapped from the quantum states associated with the symbols of the particular codeword of the signal are stored before any of the quantum operations are applied to the input qubits (i.e. Optical buffers 920 may temporarily store particular symbols of temporally encoded codeword 901 . In one example, optical buffers 920 may include optical paths (e.g., optical fibers) of different lengths so that when the n-th symbol is received by optical buffer 920 -N, all n symbols are forwarded to unitary transformation device 410 at substantially the same time- ¶0077) . Regarding claim 13, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Saikat teaches: wherein information used for decoding the particular codeword of the signal is provided from the quantum operations before any quantum operations are applied to any input qubits mapped from quantum states associated with symbols of any codeword received from the signal after the particular codeword was received (i.e. The optical receiver may further include n optical detectors, where a particular one of the n optical detectors is to detect a particular optical symbol of the transformed optical codeword, and to determine whether the particular optical symbol corresponds to a first optical symbol or a second optical symbol. The optical receiver may also include a decoder to construct a codeword based on the determinations, and to decode the constructed codeword into a message using the codebook- Abstract… decode the converted electrical symbols into an estimate of the k-bit message, and forward the decoded message to receiving device 170- ¶0034) . Regarding claim 20, computer-readable medium storing instructions claim 20 corresponds to the same method as claimed in claim 1, and therefore is also rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as listed above. Regarding claim 21, apparatus claim 21 is drawn to the apparatus using/performing the same method as claimed in claim 1. Therefore, apparatus claim 21 corresponds to method claim 1, and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. Regarding claim 22, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 21 and Saikat teaches: wherein the signal interface is configured to receive the quantum states from an optical communications channel (i.e. Optical buffers 920 may temporarily store particular symbols of temporally encoded codeword 901. In one example, optical buffers 920 may include optical paths (e.g., optical fibers) of different lengths so that when the n-th symbol is received by optical buffer 920-N, all n symbols are forwarded to unitary transformation device 410 at substantially the same time- ¶0077) . Regarding claim 23, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 22 and Saikat teaches: wherein the optical communications channel comprises an optical fiber (i.e. Optical buffers 920 may temporarily store particular symbols of temporally encoded codeword 901. In one example, optical buffers 920 may include optical paths (e.g., optical fibers) of different lengths so that when the n-th symbol is received by optical buffer 920-N, all n symbols are forwarded to unitary transformation device 410 at substantially the same time- ¶0077 ) . Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saikat Guha [US 20120177385 A1] in view of Li-Bing Chen [Efficient Nonlocal M-Control and N-Target Controlled Unitary Gate Using Non-symmetric GHZ States] and further in view of Nissim Ofek et al. [US 20190049495 A1] and even further in view of Dennis Lucarelli [US 20200119748 A1] . Regarding claim 9, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: further comprising generating the quantum circuit based at least in part on the set of codewords. In the same field of endeavor, Dennis teaches further comprising generating the quantum circuit based at least in part on the set of codewords (In the quantum circuit 130 , the quantum codewords 104 are coupled to the ancilla qubits 106 (illustrated as values |A i >) by CNOT gates (illustrated as vertical lines starting at the control data qubit and terminating with a cross at the target ancilla qubit) if, and only if, the binary number located in the i-th row and j-th column of the logical parity-check matrix 120 is equal to “1”- ¶0060) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Dennis to detect and correct errors occurring in the measurement or coupling process performed at least in part by the logical parity encoder and the logical parity decoder (Dennis- ¶0022). Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saikat Guha [US 20120177385 A1] in view of Li-Bing Chen [Efficient Nonlocal M-Control and N-Target Controlled Unitary Gate Using Non-symmetric GHZ States] and further in view of Nissim Ofek et al. [US 20190049495 A1] and even further in view of Dirk Robert Walter Leipold et al. [US 20190393400 A1] . Regarding claim 11, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: wherein the initial quantum measurement comprises a destructive measurement that determines classical information from the initially measured qubit and prepares a quantum state of an ancilla qubit based on the classical information to provide the post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit. In the same field of endeavor, Dirk teaches wherein the initial quantum measurement comprises a destructive measurement that determines classical information from the initially measured qubit and prepares a quantum state of an ancilla qubit based on the classical information to provide the post-measurement state associated with the initially measured qubit (i.e. Unlike most classical logic gates, quantum logic gates are reversible. It is possible, however, although cumbersome in practice, to perform classical computing using only reversible gates. For example, the reversible Toffoli gate can implement all Boolean functions, often at the cost of having to use ancillary bits. The Toffoli gate has a direct quantum equivalent, demonstrating that quantum circuits can perform all operations performed by classical circuits- ¶0223… Since the particle is injected (or transferred) from the quantum well into a classic well, the quantum state collapses. This detection is destructive since the quantum state is destroyed during the measurement process. It is destroyed specifically during the instance the particle sees a low resistance path, i.e. is connected, to the sea of carriers on the classic side- ¶0420) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Dirk to perforrm all operations performed by classical circuits (Dirk- ¶ 0023 ). Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saikat Guha [US 20120177385 A1] in view of Li-Bing Chen [Efficient Nonlocal M-Control and N-Target Controlled Unitary Gate Using Non-symmetric GHZ States] and further in view of Nissim Ofek et al. [US 20190049495 A1] and even further in view of Hanhee Paik [US 20140314419 A1] . Regarding claim 14, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: wherein mapping the quantum states associated with symbols of the particular codeword of the signal to the plurality of input qubits comprises converting optical qubits to qubits represented by a quantum state of a trapped atom or ion, or a quantum state of a superconducting circuit, or a nitrogen-vacancy center. In the same field of endeavor, Hanhee teaches wherein mapping the quantum states associated with symbols of the particular codeword of the signal to the plurality of input qubits comprises converting optical qubits to qubits represented by a quantum state of a trapped atom or ion, or a quantum state of a superconducting circuit, or a nitrogen-vacancy center (i.e. An electro-optical system for exchanging quantum information between optical qubits and including a superconductive microwave cavity; an electro-optical material: a superconductive qubit circuit formed on the electro-optical material including a superconductive qubit; a dipole antenna, formed on the electro-optical material for directly coupling the superconductive qubit to the superconductive microwave cavity; an optical input for receiving input optical photons; a microwave input for receiving input microwave photons; and an optical output for outputting modulated optical photons, wherein a frequency and a phase of the optical photon is modulated with a state of the superconducting qubit by the dipole antenna- Abstract… In some embodiments, the present invention is an electro-optical system for exchanging quantum information between optical qubits and superconducting qubits, The system includes a superconductive microwave cavity; an electro-optical material positioned inside of the superconductive microwave cavity; a superconductive qubit circuit formed on the electro-optical material including a superconductive qubit having two electrodes; a dipole antenna, formed on the electro-optical material by the two electrodes attached to a single Josephson junction, for directly coupling the superconductive qubit to the superconductive microwave cavity; an optical photon input for receiving input optical photons; a microwave photon input for receiving input microwave photons; and an optical photon output for outputting modulated optical photons, wherein a frequency and a phase of the optical photon is modulated with a state of the superconducting qubit by the dipole antenna- ¶0012) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Hanhee to have reduced sensitivity to charge noise via significantly increasing the ratio of the Josephson energy to the charging energy (Hanhee- ¶0007) . Regarding claim 15, Saikat, Li-Bing, Nissim and Hanhee teach all the limitations of claim 14 and Saikat further teaches: wherein the optical qubits comprise output photons that result from nonlinear optical interactions between a first set of input photons included in the signal and a second set of input photons (i.e. According to another aspect, a method, performed by an optical receiver, may include: receiving, by the optical receiver, an optical codeword associated with a codebook, the optical codeword including n symbols; performing, by the optical receiver, a unitary transformation on the received optical codeword to generate a transformed optical codeword including n transformed symbols, which may be an entangled state of n symbols, where the unitary transformation corresponds to a lossless rotation on the quantum states of the n symbols- ¶0004) received from an entangled photon pair source (i.e. FIG. 2A is a diagram illustrating a graph 200 of photon information efficiency. As shown in FIG. 2A, graph 200 may illustrate a relationship between bits per photon and mean photon number per mode, represented as curve 210- ¶0036… Modulator 330 may receive a codeword from encoder 320 and may generate modulated light signal 150 that includes optical codeword state 340. Modulator 330 may use BPSK to convert bits of the received n-bit codeword into one of two possible light symbols |+a and |-a. For example, |+a may correspond to a first phase of a photon and |-a may correspond to a second phase of a photon- ¶0042) . Regarding claim 16, Saikat, Li-Bing, Nissim and Hanhee teach all the limitations of claim 15 and Saikat further teaches: wherein the first set of input photons were derived from photons received from the entangled photon pair source before being encoded as symbols of the particular codeword of the signal (i.e. Unitary transformation device 410 may receive optical codeword 340 and may perform a unitary transformation in the optical domain on the received optical codeword 340. The unitary transformation may correspond to a joint operation performed on all the symbols of the received optical codeword 340 simultaneously. Unitary transformation device 410 may output a transformed (and possibly entangled) optical quantum state of the received optical codeword 340- ¶0045) . Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saikat Guha [US 20120177385 A1] in view of Li-Bing Chen [Efficient Nonlocal M-Control and N-Target Controlled Unitary Gate Using Non-symmetric GHZ States] and further in view of Nissim Ofek et al. [US 20190049495 A1] and even further in view of Fan Zhang et al. [US 20130208377 A1] . Regarding claim 17, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 1. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: wherein the particular codeword is associated with a factor graph and the quantum circuit is arranged to perform a belief propagation procedure for decoding the particular codeword of the signal. In the same field of endeavor, Fan teaches: wherein the particular codeword is associated with a factor graph and the quantum circuit is arranged to perform a belief propagation procedure for decoding the particular codeword of the signal (i.e. Various embodiments of the present invention provide data processing systems that include a data decoder circuit and a data detection circuit. In such systems, data is processed through the data detection circuit to yield a detected output, and the detected output is processed through the data decoder circuit to yield a decoded output. The data decoder circuit may be a low density parity check (LDPC) decoder circuit that applies a belief-propagation algorithm to a received data set. As is known in the art, a data set processed by an LDPC decoder circuit (i.e., an LDPC codeword) can be represented by its parity check matrix H or a corresponding Tanner graph. Conceptually, the aforementioned belief-propagation algorithm passes soft data or log likelihood data along edges of a Tanner graph as is known in the art. Embodiments of the present invention apply a scaling factor to messages passed in the belief-propagation algorithm, and adaptively adjust the magnitude of the scaling factor to increase the likelihood that application of the algorithm applied by the data decoder circuit- ¶0016) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Fan to adaptively adjust the magnitude of the scaling factor to increase the likelihood that application of the algorithm applied by the data decoder circuit (Fan- ¶0016) . Regarding claim 18, Saikat, Li-Bing, Nissim and Fan teach all the limitations of claim 17. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: wherein the belief propagation procedure includes quantum message passing implemented using the quantum circuit. In the same field of endeavor, Fan teaches: wherein the belief propagation procedure includes quantum message passing implemented using the quantum circuit (i.e. Once a data decoding circuit 370 is available, a previously stored interleaved codeword 346 is accessed from central memory circuit 350 as a stored codeword 386 and globally interleaved by a global interleaver/de-interleaver circuit 384. Global interleaver/De-interleaver circuit 384 may be any circuit known in the art that is capable of globally rearranging codewords. Global interleaver/De-interleaver circuit 384 provides a decoder input 352 into data decoding circuit 370. Data decoder circuit 370 includes adaptive decoder message scaling circuitry. One example of such adaptive decoder message scaling circuitry is described in more detail below in relation to FIGS. 3b-3c. As more fully described below, data decoder circuit implements a belief-propagation algorithm that passes soft data or log likelihood data as messages along edges of a Tanner graph. These messages are multiplied by a scaling factor that is adaptively modified during one or more local iterations through data decoder circuit 370. In some embodiments of the present invention, the data decode algorithm applied by data decoding circuit 370 is a low density parity check algorithm as are known in the art. Based upon the disclosure provided herein, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize other decode algorithms that may be used in relation to different embodiments of the present invention. Data decoding circuit 370 applies a data decode algorithm to decoder input 352 to yield a decoded output 371. In cases where another local iteration (i.e., another pass trough data decoder circuit 370) is desired, data decoding circuit 370 re-applies the data decode algorithm to decoder input 352 guided by decoded output 371 and using a scaling factor that is adjusted for the particular local iteration. This continues until either a maximum number of local iterations is exceeded or decoded output 371 converges- ¶0028) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Fan to adaptively adjust the magnitude of the scaling factor to increase the likelihood that application of the algorithm applied by the data decoder circuit (Fan- ¶0016) . Regarding claim 19, Saikat, Li-Bing, Nissim and Fan teach all the limitations of claim 18. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: wherein the belief propagation procedure includes reducing the factor graph into one or more disjoint factor graphs resulting from parity checks associated with the symbol constellation. In the same field of endeavor, Fan teaches: wherein the belief propagation procedure includes quantum message passing implemented using the quantum circuit (i.e. Data decoder circuit 520 and data decoder circuit 540 each implement a belief-propagation data decode algorithm. In one particular embodiment of the present invention, the belief-propagation data decode algorithm is implemented as a low density parity check encoding algorithm. Data decoder circuit 520 and data decoder circuit 540 operate in parallel on the same data set. The result of processing by data decoder circuit 520 is a decoder output 550 including messages 525. Decoder output 550 corresponds to decoded output 371 of FIG. 3. When applying the belief-propagation algorithm, data decoder circuit 520 multiplies messages passed as edges of a Tanner graph by a scaling factor 537. In contrast, when applying the belief-propagation algorithm, data decoder circuit 540 multiplies messages passed as edges of a Tanner graph by scaling factor 535. Of note, scaling factor 535 is a next value to be tried as a scalar, and scaling factor 537 is a previous value of the scalar- ¶0032-33) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Fan to adaptively adjust the magnitude of the scaling factor to increase the likelihood that application of the algorithm applied by the data decoder circuit (Fan- ¶0016) . Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saikat Guha [US 20120177385 A1] in view of Li-Bing Chen [Efficient Nonlocal M-Control and N-Target Controlled Unitary Gate Using Non-symmetric GHZ States] and further in view of Nissim Ofek et al. [US 20190049495 A1] and even further in view of Mark A. Novotny [US 20190370680 A1] . Regarding claim 24, Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim teach all the limitations of claim 21. However, Saika, Li-Bing and Nissim do not teach explicitly: wherein the signal interface is configured to receive the quantum states from a quantum register that is coupled to a control module that is configured to apply quantum gate operations among quantum states stored in the quantum register. In the same field of endeavor, Mark teaches: wherein the signal interface is configured to receive the quantum states from a quantum register that is coupled to a control module that is configured to apply quantum gate operations among quantum states stored in the quantum register (i.e. Currently, gate-based quantum computers are able to input a register of qubits which are the initial states of the calculation, and perform a sequence of unitary gate operations on the entangled qubit register, ending with and/or interspersed with a sequence of full or partial measurements of the quantum system. Note that the unitary operations are reversible, while the full or partial measurements procedures are not reversible. The qubit register, the unitary gates, and the measurement procedures can be implemented using a qubit implementation, such as superconducting trapped ion, or entangled photons. The present invention provides a gated quantum computer or machine to obtain, provide, or return the number of ground states. In the future, it is possible that quantum computing devices will be a hybrid of annealing machines and gated machines. The present invention provides a method, system, and apparatus wherein such a hybrid adiabatic and/or gated quantum computer or machine can obtain, provide, and/or return the number of ground states- ¶0006-0008) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Saikat, Li-Bing and Nissim with the teachings of Mark to obtain, provide, and/or return the number of ground states (Mark- ¶0006) . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-8 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 FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CLIFFORD HILAIRE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-8397 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 5:30-1400 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT SATH V PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7455 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT CLIFFORD HILAIRE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2488 /CLIFFORD HILAIRE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488