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 .
This action is made non-final.
Claims 1-13 are pending. Claims 1 and 7 are independent claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to for minor informalities: Claim 13 recites: “wherein Z is a Pauli gate according to the axis…” but should recite “wherein Z is a Pauli gate according to the axis Z”, or similar. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: Claim 7: at least one source adapted to emit a sequence of quantum states… a measurement device for measuring received quantum states… quantum component making it possible to carry out said quantum computation…an input interface for receiving said sequence… a transformation device adapted to modify a quantum state of said sequence… an output interface for transmitting said sequence to said measuring device – and – Claim 8: a first device for applying a first transformation aiming to prepare quantum states… a second device for applying a second transformation aiming to prepare quantum states… These interpretations also apply to the dependent claims 8-13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In claim 7 and related dependent claims 8-13:
The “at least one source adapted to emit a sequence of quantum states” is interpreted to be a photon emitter, as suggested by specification ¶42-43, According to the invention, a source 40 is intended to generate and emit a sequence of quantum states to the client, throughout a communication line 31. Quantum states can be carried by different technologies. According to a preferred implementation, the quantum states are carried by photons.
The “measurement device for measuring received quantum states” is interpreted to be a photon detector as described in ¶60, The measuring device 21 of the server 20 may consist of one single photon detector.
The “transformation device adapted to modify a quantum state of said sequence” is interpreted to utilize optical modulators, as described in ¶55, The transformation devices 12 may then consist of optical modulators.
In claim 8,
The first device for applying a first transformation aiming to prepare quantum states… and second device for applying a second transformation aiming to prepare quantum states… are interpreted to each be optical modulators as described in ¶110, According to an embodiment of the invention, the transformation device 21 includes two (or more) distinct devices, each adapted for a particular transformation… For example, a first device (for example an optical modulator) … and a second device (for example a second optical modulator)
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 limitations “quantum component making it possible to carry out said quantum computation”, “an input interface for receiving said sequence”, “output interface for transmitting said sequence to said measuring device” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. With respect to the quantum component, the specification ¶59 recites: The server 20 may further include one or more quantum elements 22 making it possible to perform the quantum computations that are delegated to the server. In particular these quantum components may comprise a quantum memory making it possible to store received qubits, means for performing operations on one or more qubits, etc. It is unclear what structure, material or acts “quantum memory” corresponds to, and means for performing operations on one or more qubits is a description that further lacks sufficient structure, material or acts. With respect to the input interface and output interface, the specification recites ¶76, a source 40 emits a state sequence on the input interface 11 of the client. These quantum states are transmitted via a communication link 31. Typically, this communication link 31 is an optical fiber enabling the transmission of photons… and ¶37, an input interface 11 adapted to the reception of a sequence of quantum states, a transformation device 12 adapted to the modification of the received quantum states, and an output interface 13 adapted to the emission of the quantum states – which suggests that quantum states are typically transmitted via an optical fiber link, and that the interfaces possibly involve optical fiber, but do not provide sufficient structure, materials, or acts that link the interfaces to their claimed functions. The drawings are also not specific and do not provide any structural information. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The recited claim 7 limitations “quantum component making it possible to carry out said quantum computation”, “an input interface for receiving said sequence”, and “output interface for transmitting said sequence to said measuring device” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) limitations, however they are not supported by sufficient structure, material, or acts to perform the claimed functions. Therefore, the claims lack sufficient written description (see MPEP 2181(IV)).
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) 1, 2 and 4-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (“Blind quantum computation for a user who only performs single-qubit gates”, 2020, included in IDS), herein Li, in view of Lukens et al. (US 20200274703 A1), herein Lukens.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches: A method for delegating a quantum computation by at least one client to a server (pg. 3, Alice can achieve universal quantum computation with the help of a quantum server Bob in both presented protocols), comprising - a first step comprising the transmission to the server of a description of entanglements to be performed in a quantum memory (pg. 3, Alice asks Bob to generate a brickwork state according to the graph G specified by her)… - a third step comprising a modification of a quantum state of said sequence (pg. 3, Alice prepares m qubits and sends them to the server Bob), - a fourth step comprising the transmission of said sequence to said server (pg. 3, Alice prepares m qubits and sends them to the server Bob); - a fifth step comprising the application of a sequence of measurements according to a given base, within said quantum memory whose content has been entangled according to said description (pg. 3, Bob performs a measurement on the i-th (i =1, 2,...,m) qubit in the basis {|±δi⟩}), and the transmission of the result of each measurement to said at least one client (pg. 3, and informs Alice about the measurement result).
Li fails to teach: - a second step comprising the emission of a sequence of quantum states by a source, distinct from said server, to said at least one client…
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: - a second step comprising the emission of a sequence of quantum states by a source, distinct from said server, to said at least one client (¶54, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode. The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit, such as by transforming the photon into a superposition of two frequency bins with a Hadamard operation)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a source that emits quantum states as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to enable distributed quantum processing on existing infrastructure (¶54, The encoded photon is then directed through the public communication network 602 to Bob – and – ¶53, Alice and Bob can send secure communications… over a public communication network 602, such as a long distance fiber-optic network, by using frequency-encoded quantum bits (qubits)).
Regarding claim 2, Li further teaches: The method of claim 1… and the modification performed by said client is in the form Zθ+c.π wherein Z is Pauli gate according to the axis Z, 0 is randomly selected from a list {0; π/4; π/2; 3π/4} and c is randomly selected amongst the 0 and 1 values (pg. 3, After receiving each qubit, Alice first performs H gate on it and then randomly applies the gate σz1/4 on it for n times in order to make the state of qubit be
PNG
media_image1.png
102
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where n is uniformly chosen from {0,1,··· ,7}).
Li fails to teach: wherein the quantum states supplied by said source are a superposition of orthogonal states.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein the quantum states supplied by said source are a superposition of orthogonal states (¶54, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode. The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit, such as by transforming the photon into a superposition of two frequency bins with a Hadamard operation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a source that emits quantum states in superposition, such as entangled photons, as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to enable distributed quantum processing on existing infrastructure (¶54, The encoded photon is then directed through the public communication network 602 to Bob – and – ¶53, Alice and Bob can send secure communications… over a public communication network 602, such as a long distance fiber-optic network, by using frequency-encoded quantum bits (qubits)).
Regarding claim 4, Li fails to teach: The method of claim 1, wherein each of said at least one client can modify only part of the quantum states allocated thereto, and transmits said sequence to a subsequent client of a client chain linking it to said server.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein each of said at least one client can modify only part of the quantum states allocated thereto, and transmits said sequence to a subsequent client of a client chain linking it to said server (see fig. 10 and ¶63, FIG. 10 shows an example quantum frequency processor 1000 that includes a frequency bin qubit source 1002 configured to provide frequency bin qubits. The qubits are coupled to a sequence of a first EOM 1004, a pulse shaper 1006, and a second EOM 1008, that can together apply one or more parallel quantum gate operations to the received qubits… Any number of gates can be provided, each being independently controlled, with the quantity limited generally by insertion losses associated with the number of pulse shapers, EOMs or other photonics components arranged in series).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a chain of clients as disclosed by Lukens in the system disclosed by Li to implement quantum processing on existing fiber optics (¶61, Of particular benefit can include existing single-mode optical fibers that can be configured to propagate frequency-bin photons and associated qubits (and qudits) over substantial distances).
Regarding claim 5, Li fails to teach: The method of claim 4, wherein said part is determined by an allocation of a time window.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein said part is determined by an allocation of a time window (¶61, the mixed photons 904 are directed to the pulse shaper 910 which can include various components, such as a diffraction grating… and a phase shifter… configured to selectably apply phase shifts to the photons 904, typically corresponding to one or more quantum gate operations – a phase shift shifts a photon’s wave function by certain amounts (i.e., time windows) so phase shifters that selectably apply gate-dependent phase shifts to photons are modifying parts (i.e., phases) based on the phase shifter’s allocated time window).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine modifiable quantum state parts by using an allocated time window as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to effectively implement successive quantum gates on existing networks (¶61, typically corresponding to one or more quantum gate operations (such as Pauli X, Pauli Y, Pauli Z. Hadamard, Phase, CNOT, SWAP, Toffoli, etc.). The phase-shifted and mixed photons 904 are coupled back into a single-mode optical fiber).
Regarding claim 6, Li fails to teach: The method of claim 1, wherein each of said at least one client can modify only part of the quantum states allocated thereto, and transmits said sequence to a subsequent client of a client chain linking it to said server.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein each of said at least one client can modify only part of the quantum states allocated thereto, and transmits said sequence to a subsequent client of a client chain linking it to said server (see fig. 10 and ¶63, FIG. 10 shows an example quantum frequency processor 1000 that includes a frequency bin qubit source 1002 configured to provide frequency bin qubits. The qubits are coupled to a sequence of a first EOM 1004, a pulse shaper 1006, and a second EOM 1008, that can together apply one or more parallel quantum gate operations to the received qubits… Any number of gates can be provided, each being independently controlled, with the quantity limited generally by insertion losses associated with the number of pulse shapers, EOMs or other photonics components arranged in series).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to successively modify the same quantum state via several clients as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to successfully encode detailed quantum information for use in fiber networks (¶31, Quantum information encoding in optical frequency can allow for quantum computing both on chip and over distributed fiber networks).
Regarding claim 7, Li teaches: A system for delegating a quantum computation from at least one client to a server (pg. 1, In such a situation, suppose that a user Alice needs to delegate her computational problems that cannot be efficiently done on classical computers to a quantum server Bob, and she also wants to keep all the data including input, output, and algorithm private. Then BQC comes into being as a solution – BQC stands for blind quantum computation)… wherein the server measures received quantum states, and carries out quantum computation (pg. 3, Alice prepares m qubits and sends them to the server Bob… Alice asks Bob to generate a brickwork state according to the graph G specified by her…. Bob produces the brickwork state |G(θ)⟩ by applying controlled-Z gates on the received qubits based on the graph G – Bob can receive qubits, then perform computations with them); and said at least one client is able to modify a quantum state of said sequence (pg. 3, Bob sends to Alice m + k qubits in the computational-based state |0⟩… After receiving each qubit, Alice first performs H gate on it – Alice can receive qubits and perform computations on them).
Li fails to explicitly teach: including at least one source adapted to emit a sequence of quantum states… includes a measurement device for measuring… one quantum component making it possible to carry out said… including an input interface for receiving said sequence, a transformation device adapted and an output interface for transmitting said sequence to said measuring device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: including at least one source adapted to emit a sequence of quantum states (¶54, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode. The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit, such as by transforming the photon into a superposition of two frequency bins with a Hadamard operation)… includes a measurement device for measuring (fig. 6, 610)… one quantum component making it possible to carry out said quantum computations (¶28, Examples of quantum frequency processors (QFPs) can be adapted to fit within a 19″ rack mount, requiring no user adjustments inside the enclosure, and can be deployable in power delivery environments for implementing point-to-point QKD between, e.g., power plants and substations – and – ¶29, QFPs can be configured to implement fundamental quantum state operations, such as the Hadamard gate and controlled-NOT, which are useful for applications in quantum computing and QKD)… including an input interface for receiving said sequence (¶61, Suitable electro-optic modulators can be fiber-coupled and perform electro-optic modulation across fiber-optic or other waveguides – and – ¶60, Additional transmit optical fibers or other network communication inputs and outputs (e.g., wired or wireless communications) can also be provided, including for carrying out various QKD tasks, including bit or measurement basis publication and comparisons, error correction, noise assessment, and privacy amplification, by way of example), a transformation device adapted (¶61, a phase shifter 916 (e.g., liquid crystal on silicon) configured to selectably apply phase shifts to the photons 904, typically corresponding to one or more quantum gate operations (such as Pauli X, Pauli Y, Pauli Z. Hadamard, Phase, CNOT, SWAP, Toffoli, etc.))… and an output interface for transmitting said sequence to said measuring device (¶61, Suitable electro-optic modulators can be fiber-coupled and perform electro-optic modulation across fiber-optic or other waveguides – and – ¶60, Additional transmit optical fibers or other network communication inputs and outputs (e.g., wired or wireless communications) can also be provided, including for carrying out various QKD tasks, including bit or measurement basis publication and comparisons, error correction, noise assessment, and privacy amplification, by way of example).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a source that emits quantum states, interfaces for receiving and transmitting quantum states, devices that transform, measure or carry out quantum computations as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to enable distributed optical quantum processing on existing infrastructure (¶54, The encoded photon is then directed through the public communication network 602 to Bob – and – ¶53, Alice and Bob can send secure communications… over a public communication network 602, such as a long distance fiber-optic network, by using frequency-encoded quantum bits (qubits)).
Regarding claim 8, Li fails to explicitly teach: The system of claim 7, wherein said transformation device includes a first device for applying a first transformation aiming to prepare quantum states for performing a blind quantum computation, and a second device for applying a second transformation aiming to prepare quantum states to verify a honesty of said server.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein said transformation device includes a first device for applying a first transformation aiming to prepare quantum states (¶61, Suitable electro-optic modulators can be fiber-coupled and perform electro-optic modulation across fiber-optic or other waveguides to produce the desired frequency mixing effect. The mixed photons 904 are directed to the pulse shaper 910 which can include various components, such as a diffraction grating 914 configured to disperse the frequency bin components of the photons 904 and a phase shifter 916 (e.g., liquid crystal on silicon) configured to selectably apply phase shifts to the photons 904, typically corresponding to one or more quantum gate operations (such as Pauli X, Pauli Y, Pauli Z. Hadamard, Phase, CNOT, SWAP, Toffoli, etc.)) for performing a blind quantum computation, and a second device for applying a second transformation aiming to prepare quantum states to verify a honesty of said server (see fig. 10 and ¶63, FIG. 10 shows an example quantum frequency processor 1000 that includes a frequency bin qubit source 1002 configured to provide frequency bin qubits. The qubits are coupled to a sequence of a first EOM 1004, a pulse shaper 1006, and a second EOM 1008, that can together apply one or more parallel quantum gate operations to the received qubits… Any number of gates can be provided, each being independently controlled, with the quantity limited generally by insertion losses associated with the number of pulse shapers, EOMs or other photonics components arranged in series – multiple of the phase shifters (which transform quantum states) may be operated in sequence).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a transformation device consisting of two devices that operate on quantum states as disclosed by Lukens in the system disclosed by Li to implement quantum processing into existing infrastructure (¶28, Representative examples of QKD methods and systems described herein, unlike many previous technologies, can be integrated seamlessly into existing fiber-optic infrastructure and enable high-speed encryption through frequency-domain parallelization).
Regarding claim 9, Li fails to teach: The system of claim 7, wherein the source and the measurement device are distributed into distinct physical location.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein the source and the measurement device are distributed into distinct physical location (¶54, For example, in line with the BB84 protocol, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode – and – ¶63, FIG. 10 shows an example quantum frequency processor 1000 that includes a frequency bin qubit source 1002 configured to provide frequency bin qubits. The qubits are coupled to a sequence of a first EOM 1004, a pulse shaper 1006, and a second EOM 1008, that can together apply one or more parallel quantum gate operations to the received qubits… Any number of gates can be provided, each being independently controlled – the various gates, including the Hadamard gate used to put photons in superposition, are associated with Alice – ¶60, The photons 904 can be sent from a distant sender, such as by Alice in single-photon QKD examples).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a source and measurement device in different locations as disclosed by Lukens in the system disclosed by Li to allow a client to configure qubits for communication with a server (¶54, The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit, such as by transforming the photon into a superposition of two frequency bins with a Hadamard operation. The encoded photon is then directed through the public communication network 602 to Bob).
Regarding claim 10, Li fails to teach: The system of claim 7, wherein a plurality of clients are connected to said server by one single communication line by forming a chain, so that said quantum states are progressively transmitted from said source to said measurement device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein a plurality of clients are connected to said server by one single communication line by forming a chain, so that said quantum states are progressively transmitted from said source to said measurement device (see fig. 10 and ¶63, FIG. 10 shows an example quantum frequency processor 1000 that includes a frequency bin qubit source 1002 configured to provide frequency bin qubits. The qubits are coupled to a sequence of a first EOM 1004, a pulse shaper 1006, and a second EOM 1008, that can together apply one or more parallel quantum gate operations to the received qubits… Any number of gates can be provided, each being independently controlled, with the quantity limited generally by insertion losses associated with the number of pulse shapers, EOMs or other photonics components arranged in series – this described implementation can be used in the fig. 6 example configuration – the frequency bin encoder in fig. 6 can be a QFP (quantum frequency processor) as described in ¶54, The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples)).
Regarding claim 11, Li fails to teach: The system of claim 10, wherein each of said clients is configured so as to be able to modify only the part of the quantum states allocated thereto.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein each of said clients is configured so as to be able to modify only the part of the quantum states allocated thereto (¶61, The mixed photons 904 are directed to the pulse shaper 910 which can include various components, such as a diffraction grating 914 configured to disperse the frequency bin components of the photons 904 and a phase shifter 916 (e.g., liquid crystal on silicon) configured to selectably apply phase shifts to the photons 904, typically corresponding to one or more quantum gate operations (such as Pauli X, Pauli Y, Pauli Z. Hadamard, Phase, CNOT, SWAP, Toffoli, etc.)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use clients that can only modify a part of allocated quantum states as disclosed by Lukens in the system disclosed by Li to implement quantum processing on existing fiber optic networks (¶61, Of particular benefit can include existing single-mode optical fibers that can be configured to propagate frequency-bin photons and associated qubits (and qudits) over substantial distances).
Regarding claim 12, Li fails to teach: The system of claim 7, wherein said quantum states are photons and said transformation device is an optical modulator.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein said quantum states are photons and said transformation device is an optical modulator (¶63, FIG. 10 shows an example quantum frequency processor 1000 that includes a frequency bin qubit source 1002 configured to provide frequency bin qubits. The qubits are coupled to a sequence of a first EOM 1004, a pulse shaper 1006, and a second EOM 1008, that can together apply one or more parallel quantum gate operations to the received qubits. The qubits can be output and detected or can be directed to one or more of a series of quantum frequency processor gates 1010a-1010c each having a respective pair of pulse shapers 1012a-1012c and EOMs 1014a-1014c – EOM stands for electro-optic modulator. The EOMs operate on photons – ¶61, During operation, the first electro-optic modulator 906 receives the photons 904 and applies a frequency-bin mixing operation to the photons 904 through a sinusoidal (or other shaped) voltage application received from a voltage waveform generator 912 – the photons are manipulated as qubits with quantum states: ¶54, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode. The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify photons with an optical modulator as disclosed by Lukens in the system disclosed by Li to implement quantum processing on existing fiber optic networks (¶61, Of particular benefit can include existing single-mode optical fibers that can be configured to propagate frequency-bin photons and associated qubits (and qudits) over substantial distances).
Regarding claim 13, Li teaches: The system of claim 7, wherein… and said transformation device is adapted to perform a modification in the form Zθ+c.π wherein Z is a Pauli gate according to the Z-axis, θ is randomly selected from a list {0; π/4; π/2; 3π/4}and c is randomly selected amongst the 0 and 1 values (pg. 3, After receiving each qubit, Alice first performs H gate on it and then randomly applies the gate σz1/4 on it for n times in order to make the state of qubit be
PNG
media_image1.png
102
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where n is uniformly chosen from {0,1,··· ,7}.).
Li fails to teach: said source is adapted to supply quantum states in the form of a superposition of orthogonal states…
However, in the same field of endeavor, said source is adapted to supply quantum states in the form of a superposition of orthogonal states (¶54, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode. The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit, such as by transforming the photon into a superposition of two frequency bins with a Hadamard operation)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a source that emits quantum states in superposition, such as entangled photons, as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to enable distributed quantum processing on existing infrastructure (¶54, The encoded photon is then directed through the public communication network 602 to Bob – and – ¶53, Alice and Bob can send secure communications… over a public communication network 602, such as a long distance fiber-optic network, by using frequency-encoded quantum bits (qubits)).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Lukens as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Broadbent et al. (“Universal Blind Quantum Computation”, 2009, included in IDS), herein Broadbent and Nielsen (“Cluster-state Quantum Communication”, 2005).
Regarding claim 3, Li further teaches: The method according to claim 1… and including a step of determining a subset of trapped qubits (pg. 3, Alice checks whether Bob is honest by asking Bob to measure k qubits and reveal the results, and the other m qubits will be left for the computation if the test is passed)… and said client implements a step of comparing a result of a measurement of one of said trap qubits with an expected result for said trap qubit, allowing determining a honesty of said server (pg. 13, Alice uses the results of the trap qubit measurements to estimate the error rate; if it is below the threshold (see discussion in the main text), she accepts, otherwise she rejects).
Li fails to teach: wherein the quantum states supplied by said source are a superposition of orthogonal states…
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lukens teaches: wherein the quantum states supplied by said source are a superposition of orthogonal states (¶54, Alice can use a photon source 604 to generate a photon with predetermined frequency characteristics, such as a photon defined by a single frequency mode. The photon can then be received by Alice's frequency bin encoder 606 (which can be a quantum frequency processor in some examples) and Alice can randomly adjust the photon's quantum state to form a qubit, such as by transforming the photon into a superposition of two frequency bins with a Hadamard operation)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a source that emits quantum states in superposition, such as entangled photons, as disclosed by Lukens in the method disclosed by Li to enable distributed quantum processing on existing infrastructure (¶54, The encoded photon is then directed through the public communication network 602 to Bob – and – ¶53, Alice and Bob can send secure communications… over a public communication network 602, such as a long distance fiber-optic network, by using frequency-encoded quantum bits (qubits)).
Li in view of Lukens fails to teach: and wherein said third step comprises a modification of qubits neighboring said trap qubits according to said description of entanglements…
However, in the same field of endeavor, Broadbent teaches: and wherein said third step comprises a modification of qubits neighboring said trap qubits according to said description of entanglements (pg. 7, Within each encoded qubit, add 3nT randomly interspersed trap wires, each trap being a random eigenstate of X, Y or Z (nT of each). For security, we must have nT ∝ nC; for convenience, we choose nT = nC. The trap qubit wire (at this point) does not interact with the rest of the circuit – and – pg. 7, Any fault-tolerant measurement is randomly interspersed with verification of 3nT random trap wires. For this, identity gates are added as required – also see protocol 4 and related discussion starting on page 12, which discusses trap qubits and regular ancillae measurements to detect error)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a modification of qubits neighboring trap qubits as disclosed by Broadbent in the method disclosed by Li in view of Lukens to enable the trap qubits to be measured without altering them (pg. 7, Trap qubits are verified using the same ancillae as above: they are rotated into the computational basis, measured using the pseudo-copy technique above, and then returned to their initial basis. Additionally, Broadbent is referenced by Li – Li discusses the BFK (Broadbent, Fitzsimons, Kashefi) method in comparison and conjunction with their proposed method).
Li in view of Lukens and Broadbent fails to explicitly teach: in the form XdH, wherein H is the Hadamard transformation, X is a Pauli gate according to the X axis and d is selected amongst the 0 and 1 values…
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nielsen teaches: in the form XdH, wherein H is the Hadamard transformation, X is a Pauli gate according to the X axis and d is selected amongst the 0 and 1 values (pg. 6, fig. 11, pg. 7, fig. 12, and pg. 7, Here m is the outcome (zero or one) of the computational basis measurement on the first qubit – see pg. 3, for notation, including H being the Hadamard gate and X being the Pauli X gate)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a modification for qubits that neighbor trap qubits in the form XdH as disclosed by Nielsen in the method disclosed by Li in view of Lukens and Broadbent to perform measurements on trap qubits without any loss of information (pg. 7, Observe that although the first qubit is measured, no quantum information is lost, for no matter what the measurement outcome, the posterior state of the second qubit is related by a known unitary transformation to the original input, |ψ⟩ additionally, Nielsen is referenced in Broadbent).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bacco et al. (US 20240214189 A1), discusses an optical system for quantum operations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARRISON CHAN YOUNG KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-0713. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, CESAR PAULA can be reached at (571) 272-4128. 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.
/HARRISON C KIM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2145
/CESAR B PAULA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2145
Prosecution Insights