Quantum Amplitude Estimation¶
The Problem¶
Given a unitary \(\mathcal{A}\) that prepares:
estimate \(a = \sin^2(\theta)\) where \(\theta \in [0, \pi/2]\).
Application to option pricing: Encode the option payoff into the amplitude \(a\), then \(\text{Price} = a \times \text{rescale\_factor}\).
The Grover Operator¶
QAE uses the Grover operator:
where: - \(S_\chi\) marks "good" states (flips phase of \(|1\rangle\) on objective qubits) - \(S_0\) is the zero-state reflection - The minus sign is critical (Brassard's convention): without it, eigenvalues are \(e^{\pm 4i\theta}\) instead of \(e^{\pm 2i\theta}\)
Global Phase Matters
The Grover operator must include the global phase of \(-1\). This is a common bug in implementations. qufin applies qc.global_phase += pi to ensure correctness.
QAE Variants¶
Canonical QAE (QPE-based)¶
Uses Quantum Phase Estimation on \(\mathcal{Q}\) to extract \(\theta\):
- Prepare \(\mathcal{A}|0\rangle\) in the target register
- Apply QPE with \(n_{eval}\) qubits on \(\mathcal{Q}\)
- Measure and read phase \(\tilde{\theta} = y / 2^{n_{eval}}\)
- Estimate \(a = \sin^2(\pi \tilde{\theta})\)
Accuracy: \(O(2^{-n_{eval}})\)
Circuit depth: \(O(2^{n_{eval}})\) (requires controlled-\(\mathcal{Q}^{2^k}\))
Iterative QAE (IQAE)¶
[Grinko et al., 2021] — No QPE overhead, uses adaptive schedule:
- Start with \(\theta \in [0, \pi/2]\)
- At round \(i\): choose power \(k_i\), run circuit with \(\mathcal{Q}^{k_i}\)
- Measure probability \(p_i\) that objective qubit is \(|1\rangle\)
- Key step: \(p_i = \sin^2((2k_i + 1)\theta)\) has \(O(k_i)\) solutions. Enumerate ALL candidate \(\theta\) intervals from both branches and intersect with current interval.
- Repeat until interval width \(< \epsilon\)
Accuracy: \(\epsilon\) (user-specified)
Circuit depth: Adaptive, typically \(O(1/\epsilon)\)
Multi-Branch Resolution
The equation \(\sin^2((2k+1)\theta) = p\) has multiple solutions. For each \(k\), there are two branches:
- Branch A: \(\theta = (\arcsin(\sqrt{p}) + j\pi) / (2k+1)\)
- Branch B: \(\theta = (\pi - \arcsin(\sqrt{p}) + j\pi) / (2k+1)\)
for \(j = 0, 1, \ldots, 2k\). All must be checked.
Maximum Likelihood AE (MLAE)¶
Run circuits at multiple depths \(k_1, k_2, \ldots\) and fit \(\theta\) via MLE:
Faster QAE (FQAE)¶
Grover-search-based acceleration of QAE with provable \(O(1/\epsilon)\) queries.
Comparison¶
| Variant | Extra Qubits | Max Depth | Queries to \(\epsilon\) | NISQ Friendly |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canonical | \(n_{eval}\) | \(2^{n_{eval}}\) | \(O(1/\epsilon)\) | No |
| IQAE | 0 | Adaptive | \(O(1/\epsilon)\) | Yes |
| MLAE | 0 | Fixed | \(O(1/\epsilon)\) | Yes |
| FQAE | 0 | Adaptive | \(O(1/\epsilon)\) | Moderate |
Finance Applications¶
| Application | \(\mathcal{A}\) encodes | Amplitude \(a\) represents |
|---|---|---|
| European option | GBM terminal price | Discounted expected payoff |
| Asian option | Path-average price | Average payoff |
| Barrier option | Path with barrier check | Conditional payoff |
| VaR/CVaR | Loss distribution | Tail probability |
| Credit risk | Default correlation | Portfolio loss |
References¶
- Brassard et al. (2002). "Quantum Amplitude Amplification and Estimation." AMS Contemporary Mathematics 305
- Grinko et al. (2021). "Iterative Quantum Amplitude Estimation." npj Quantum Information 7, 52
- Suzuki et al. (2020). "Amplitude estimation without phase estimation." Quantum Information Processing 19
- Stamatopoulos et al. (2020). "Option Pricing using Quantum Computers." Quantum 4, 291
- Chakrabarti et al. (2021). "A Threshold for Quantum Advantage in Derivative Pricing." Quantum 5, 463