量子代理与量子智能计算：基于均衡的因果关系定义与范式

需积分: 10 93 浏览量更新于2024-07-09 收藏 1.02MB PDF 举报

"这篇文章是《量子信息科学》期刊在2014年发表的一篇研究论文，由张文然和Peace K.E.合著。文章探讨了因果关系在逻辑上的可定义性，并提出了一种基于均衡的量子代理和量子智能计算的新范式，即QAQI。作者们在研究中回顾了从亚里士多德到现代哲学家和科学家关于因果关系的理论，并介绍了双极动态逻辑(BDL)和双极量子线性代数(BQLA)作为因果逻辑和量子代理相互作用的工具。他们展示了如何用这些理论在不同领域进行因果推断，并在此基础上构建了量子代理模型，揭示了量子智能的本质。文章还讨论了量子纠缠和量子非局域性的因果关系定律，并指出了在均衡因果推理和量子数据挖掘中的挑战。" 在这篇论文中，作者首先探讨了因果关系的历史，从古希腊哲学家亚里士多德的原始概念开始，直至当代哲学家和科学家如大卫·休谟、伯特兰·罗素、洛特菲·扎德、唐纳德·鲁宾、朱迪亚·珀尔等人的贡献。这些理论为理解因果关系提供了基础。特别是，作者引入了双极动态逻辑(BDL)，这是一种用于处理因果关系的归纳和演绎推理的逻辑系统。同时，BQLA被用来处理量子代理间的相互作用和因果关系的数学表示。接下来，作者引入了量子代理的概念，这是基于量子力学原理的智能实体模型。通过BQLA，他们展示了如何在量子框架内定义因果关系，这与传统观点相反，传统观点认为因果关系是无法规则定义的。这种新的理解导致了量子代理和量子智能计算范式(QAQI)的诞生，其中智能被视为量子现象。论文指出，量子系统的集体行为、演变和互动可以被看作是量子因果关系的结果。在QAQI范式下，作者提出了一些基本的量子因果定律，这些定律适用于解释量子纠缠现象以及量子非局域性。此外，他们也意识到了在这个领域面临的主要挑战，包括如何在均衡的因果推理中应用这些概念，以及在量子数据挖掘中有效地利用量子因果关系。最后，论文讨论了能量-信息守恒、因果律、CPT对称性、身心统一、生长与衰老等概念，这些都是量子代理和量子智能计算的重要组成部分。这项研究对于理解量子世界的复杂性和开发新的量子计算方法具有深远的影响。这篇论文提供了一个新的视角来审视因果关系，特别是在量子领域的应用，为未来的量子计算和智能系统的研究开辟了新的途径。它强调了逻辑和数学在理解自然界基本过程中的关键作用，尤其是当这些过程涉及到量子物理时。

展开

Wen-Ran Zhang & Karl E. Peace

soning in Intelligent Systems [30] is among the single most influential works in shaping the theory and practice

of knowledge-based systems in artificial intelligence, Rubin’s works have been leading in total number of cita-

tions in statistical analysis. While Pearl’s book Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference [31] went beyond

computer science and engineering and has made a major impact on the definability of causality, Rubin’s causal

model pioneered statistical assessment of cause and effect based on the conceptual framework of all potential

outcomes and is widely used in the medical and social sciences.

Here we are focused on comparing logical and statistical approaches to causal modeling but not on the two

competing statistical causal models. We randomly choose Pearl’s book as an example for our comparison with

logical approaches. Contrary to Zadeh’s assertion that “Causality is undefinable”, Judea Pearl’s book Causality:

Models, Reasoning, and Inference offers a complete axiomatic characterization – a structural causal model [31,

Ch7]. As Pearl described [32]: “Full Pearl calls for framing problems the way an investigator perceives nature

to work, regardless of whether one can estimate the parameters involved, then, once you set your model, you

mark down what you know and what you do not know, what you are sure about and what you are not sure

about, and do the analysis in this space of ‘Nature models’. If it so happens that you are only sure about the

structure of the graph and nothing else, then and only then, you do ‘graphs, colliders, and do operators.’”

It is evident from the above description that Pearl’s structural causal model is fundamentally a probabilistic

approach to reasoning and inference. In order to effectively use the model, a user needs to mark down what

he/she knows and what he/she does not know, what he/she is sure about and what he/she is not sure about. This

treatment clearly follows the empirical and analytical spirit in line with David Hume and Bertrand Russell,

where cause-effect relations are formed and improved through knowledge, experience and analysis but not on

the basis of new logical development and philosophical system building. Furthermore, since any probabilistic

certainty factor p can be deemed partial truth, the probabilistic approach is essentially truth-based. Therefore,

probabilistic or statistical definability of causality, albeit very useful in causal inference, doesn’t go beyond

truth-based reasoning and doesn’t attempt to answer the question: Is there a philosophically different funda-

mental causal logic system at the quantum level to be discovered?

2.2.6. Niels Bohr on Causality

Niels Bohr - a father figure of quantum mechanics - was the first to bring YinYang into quantum theory for his

particle-wave complementarity principle. When Bohr was awarded the Order of the Elephant by the Danish

government, he designed his own coat of arms which featured in the center a YinYang logo (or Taiji symbol)

and the Latin motto “contraria sunt complementa” or “opposites are complementary” (Fig. 1).

While Bohr’s quantum mechanics recognized particle-wave complementarity, it stopped short of identifying

the essence of YinYang bipolar coexistence. It can be argued that without bipolarity any complementarity is less

fundamental due to the missing direct “opposites” (Fig. 2) [9, 33]. If bipolar equilibrium is the most fundamental

form of equilibrium, any multidimensional model of spacetime such as string theory and superstring theory

cannot be most fundamental.

In brief, action-reaction, particle-antiparticle, negative-positive energies, input and output, or the Yin and

Yang of nature in general could be the most fundamental unitary opposites of all beings. Man and woman, space

and time, particle and wave, truth and falsity are dualities or dichotomies but not exactly unitary bipolar oppo-

sites. This could be the reason why Bohr found causal description of a quantum process unattainable and we

have to content ourselves with particle-wave complementary descriptions [5]. It could also be the fundamental

reason why quantum entanglement is still widely deemed a logical mystery until today and quantum computing

so far cannot lend itself as an analytical paradigm for quantum intelligence even though it has shown great po-

tential for solving some problems with high computation complexity. (Note: Newtonian action and reaction are

equal opposites that are extended to include non-equal opposites to account for modern discoveries such as CP

(Charge-Parity) violation.)

Wen-Ran Zhang & Karl E. Peace

Figure 1. Bohr’s Coat of Arms (Creative Commons file by GJo, 3/8/2010, Source: File:Royal Coat of Arms

of Denmark.svg (Collar of the Order of the Elephant) + File:yinyang.svg)

Figure 2. Fundamental and non-fundamental complementarities: (a) Fundamental; (b)-(d) Non-fundamental

2.2.7. Albert Einstein on Causality

According to Yemima Ben-Menahem [34], Einstein's concept of causality is comprised of: (a) regularity; (b)

locality; (c) symmetry considerations leading to conservation laws; (d) mutuality of causal interaction. It is well

known that Einstein refused to accept Bohr’s interpretation on quantum mechanics for its lack of locality, regu-

larity and causality. This led to the Einstein-Bohr debate about the nature of reality which is often called the

great debate of the 20th century. Einstein once called quantum entanglement “spooky action at a distance.” Ein-

stein, Podolsky, and Rosen challeged Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretation with the famous EPR thought experi-

ment (or EPR paradox) on quantum entanglement [35]. Until today in the 21

century, the great debate is still

unsettled and the EPR paradox is still unresolved, the mysterious quantum entanglement still finds no logical

interpretation.

Einstein struggled with logically definable causality for his whole academic life and never wavered on find-

ing a logical foundation for physics. He asserted [36]: “Physics constitutes a logical system of thought which is

in a state of evolution, whose basis (principles) cannot be distilled, as it were, from experience by an inductive

method, but can only be arrived at by free invention.” He affirmed [37]: “pure thought can grasp reality” and

“nature is the realization of the simplest conceivable mathematical ideas.” He reasserted [38]: “For the time

being we have to admit that we do not possess any general theoretical basis for physics which can be regarded

as its logical foundation.” He stated [39]: “Development of Western science is based on two great achieve-

ments: the invention of the formal logical system (in Euclidean geometry) by the Greek philosophers, and the

discovery of the possibility to find out causal relationships by systematic experiment (during the Renaissance).

In my opinion one has not to be astonished that the Chinese sages have not made those steps. The astonishing

thing is that those discoveries were made at all.”

A few conclusions can be drawn from the above quotes. First, the logic Einstein used was the truth-based

formal logical system originated from Euclidean geometry. Secondly, the truth-based system does not provide

logically definable causality with regularity. Thirdly, the causality he relied on was empirical causality that is

not a formal logical system. Fourthly, what he sought was a formal causal system for the grant unification.

Although Einstein never believed in the theory of singularity and even regarded the theory as “bizarre”, re-

sisting the logic of his own theory right up to his death in 1955, his equations of general relativity did eventually

lead to the flourish of singularity after his death following the discovery of black holes [14]. Based on singulari-

ty and partially observable truth, it is now a widely accepted theory that spacetime as well as the universe was

created by a big bang and will end in one or more black holes. So far as we know, however, the big bang came

from nowhere and caused by nothing; a black hole goes nowhere.

To reconcile the inconsistency between singularity and the second law of thermodynamics, Stephen Hawking

proposed the remedy that a black hole should have particle and/or antiparticle emission or Hawking radiation

[15, 16]. While Hawking radiation has been a hot topic of discussion in quantum theory, its far-reaching conse-

剩余39页未读，继续阅读

身份认证购VIP最低享 7 折!

30元优惠券

weixin_38698927

粉丝: 7

量子代理与量子智能计算：基于均衡的因果关系定义与范式

Python数据分析可视化-雷达图、箱型图

(源码)基于PythonFastAPI框架的桌面管理系统.zip

房地产活动策划 -常州花博会 花的知识.pptx

代码库 - 标准版，面向个人开发人员的 Autumoon 代码库标准版

永磁同步电机无感FOC中非线性磁链观测器的设计与实现

基于MATLAB的疲劳驾驶检测系统：从视频处理到GUI界面的完整实现

(源码)基于Qt框架的Qt Designer插件封装工具.zip

(源码)基于Spring Boot的翻译与语音合成系统.zip

(源码)基于Arduino和蓝牙的智能小车控制系统.zip

轴承动力学模型复现：基于Python的质心运动轨迹仿真与分析

最新资源

房地产活动策划 -常州花博会花的知识.pptx