The Foundations of Quantum Computing and Their Relation to Software Engineering

The principles of quantum mechanics – superposition, entanglement, measurement, and decoherence – form the foundation of quantum computing. Qubits, which are abstract objects having a mathematical expression to implement the rules of quantum physics, are the fundamental building blocks of computation. Software is a key component of quantum computing, along with quantum hardware. Algorithms make up software, and they are implemented using logic gates and quantum circuits. These qualities make quantum computing a paradigm that non-physicists find difficult to comprehend. It is crucial to incorporate a conceptual framework of the principles upon which quantum computing is founded into this new method of creating software. In this paper, we present a kind of taxonomical view of the fundamental concepts of quantum computing and the derived concepts that integrate the emerging discipline of quantum software engineering. Because the systematic review's main goal is to identify the core ideas behind quantum computing and quantum software, we conducted a quasi-systematic mapping as part of the review process. The findings can serve as a starting point for computer science teachers and students to address the study of this field.

1. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, 10th edition. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

2. A. A. Khan et al., “Agile Practices for Quantum Software Development: Practitioners Perspectives,” ArXiv, vol. abs/2210.09825, 2022.

3. A. J. et al., “Quantum Algorithm Implementations for Beginners,” Apr. 2018, doi: 10.1145/3517340.

4. J. J. García-Ripoll, “Specialty Grand Challenge: Quantum engineering,” Frontiers in Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 1, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.3389/frqst.2022.1029525.

5. S. T. Marella and H. S. K. Parisa, “Introduction to Quantum Computing,” in Quantum Computing and Communications, Y. Zhao, Ed., Rijeka: IntechOpen, 2020, p. Ch. 5. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.94103.

6. M. Weingärtner and T. Weingärtner, “Quantum Tic-Tac-Toe - learning the concepts of quantum mechanics in a playful way,” Computers and Education Open, vol. 4, p. 100125, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100125.

7. U. Awan, L. Hannola, A. Tandon, R. K. Goyal, and A. Dhir, “Quantum computing challenges in the software industry. A fuzzy AHP-based approach,” Inf Softw Technol, vol. 147, p. 106896, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2022.106896.

8. T. G. Wong, Introduction to Classical and Quantum Computing. Omaha, Nebraska: Rooted Grove, 2022.

9. N. S. Yanofsky and M. A. Mannucci, Quantum computing for computer scientists. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

10. E. Rieffel and W. Polak, QUANTUM COMPUTING A Gentle Introduction. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2011.

11. J. Zhao, Quantum Software Engineering: Landscapes and Horizons. 2020.

12. P. Zhao, J. Zhao, and L. Ma, “Identifying Bug Patterns in Quantum Programs,” in 2021 IEEE/ACM 2nd International Workshop on Quantum Software Engineering (Q-SE), 2021, pp. 16–21. doi: 10.1109/Q-SE52541.2021.00011.

13. P. P. Angara, U. Stege, A. MacLean, H. A. Müller, and T. Markham, “Teaching Quantum Computing to High-School-Aged Youth: A Hands-On Approach,” IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 1–15, 2022, doi: 10.1109/TQE.2021.3127503.

14. M. Mykhailova and K. M. Svore, “Teaching Quantum Computing through a Practical Software-Driven Approach: Experience Report,” in Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, in SIGCSE ’20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, pp. 1019–1025. doi: 10.1145/3328778.3366952.

15. J. Singh and K. S. Bhangu, “Contemporary Quantum Computing Use Cases: Taxonomy, Review and Challenges,” Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 615–638, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11831-022-09809-5.

16. C. D. Aiello et al., “Achieving a quantum smart workforce,” Quantum Sci Technol, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 030501, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1088/2058-9565/abfa64.

17. G. R. Oliver, Foundations of the assumed business operations and strategy body of knowledge (BOSBOK) : an outline of shareable knowledge. Sidney: Sydney University Press, 2012.

18. P. Bourque and R. E. Fairley, “Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge, Version 3.0,” 2014.

19. T. I. Ören, “Toward the Body of Knowledge of Modeling and Simulation,” in Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) 2005, 2005.

20. G. Romme, The Quest for Professionalism: The Case of Management and Entrepreneurship. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

21. H. Hart and C. Baehr, “Sustainable Practices for Developing a Body of Knowledge,” Tech Commun, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 259–266, 2013, [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26464355

22. S. S. Gill et al., “Quantum Computing: A Taxonomy, Systematic Review and Future Directions,” Sep. 2020, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2010.15559.

23. L. S. Barbosa, “Software Engineering for ‘Quantum Advantage,’” in Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops, in ICSEW’20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, pp. 427–429. doi: 10.1145/3387940.3392184.

24. G. Pontolillo and M. R. Mousavi, “A Multi-Lingual Benchmark for Property-Based Testing of Quantum Programs,” in 2022 IEEE/ACM 3rd International Workshop on Quantum Software Engineering (Q-SE), 2022, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1145/3528230.3528395.

25. Y.-P. Liao, Y.-L. Cheng, Y.-T. Zhang, H.-X. Wu, and R.-C. Lu, “The interactive system of Bloch sphere for quantum computing education,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), 2022, pp. 718–723. doi: 10.1109/QCE53715.2022.00097.

26. G. P. Temporão, T. B. S. Guerreiro, P. S. C. Ripper, and A. M. B. Pavani, “Teaching Quantum Computing without prerequisites: a case study,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), 2022, pp. 673–676. doi: 10.1109/QCE53715.2022.00090.

27. M. Mykhailova, “Developing Programming Assignments for Teaching Quantum Computing and Quantum Programming,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), 2022, pp. 688–692. doi: 10.1109/QCE53715.2022.00092.

28. C. Hughes, D. Finke, D.-A. German, C. Merzbacher, P. M. Vora, and H. J. Lewandowski, “Assessing the Needs of the Quantum Industry,” Aug. 2021, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2109.03601.

29. K. Petersen, R. Feldt, S. Mujtaba, and M. Mattsson, “Systematic Mapping Studies in Software Engineering,” pp. 1–10, 2008, doi: 10.14236/ewic/EASE2008.8.

30. B. Barn, S. Barat, and T. Clark, “Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews and Systematic Mapping Studies,” in Proceedings of the 10th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference, in ISEC ’17. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2017, pp. 212–213. doi: 10.1145/3021460.3021489.

31. K. Petersen, S. Vakkalanka, and L. Kuzniarz, “Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update,” Inf Softw Technol, vol. 64, pp. 1–18, 2015, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007.

32. B. Kitchenham and S. Charters, “Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering,” Technical report, EBSE Technical Report EBSE-2007-01, 2007. [Online]. Available: https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~norsaremah/2007%20Guidelines%20for%20performing%20SLR%20in%20SE%20v2.3.pdf

33. B. A. Kitchenham, “Systematic reviews,” in 10th International Symposium on Software Metrics, 2004. Proceedings., 2004, pp. xii–xii. doi: 10.1109/METRIC.2004.1357885.

34. J. Hannay, D. Sjøberg, and T. Dybå, “A Systematic Review of Theory Use in Software Engineering Experiments,” Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 33, pp. 87–107, Mar. 2007, doi: 10.1109/TSE.2007.12.

35. G. Tebes, D. Peppino, P. Becker, and L. Olsina, Enhancing the Process Specification for Systematic Literature Reviews. 2019. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14262.96321/1.

36. P. Brereton, B. A. Kitchenham, D. Budgen, M. Turner, and M. Khalil, “Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 571–583, 2007, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009.

37. B. Kitchenham, E. Mendes, and G. Travassos, “Cross versus Within-Company Cost Estimation Studies: A Systematic Review,” Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 33, pp. 316–329, Jun. 2007, doi: 10.1109/TSE.2007.1001.

38. M. R. W. Hiebl, “Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research,” Organ Res Methods, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 229–261, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1177/1094428120986851.

39. V. Garousi, M. Felderer, and M. V Mäntylä, “Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering,” Inf Softw Technol, vol. 106, pp. 101–121, 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2018.09.006.

40. A. Sarkar, “Automated Quantum Software Engineering: why? what? how?,” Dec. 2022, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2212.00619.

41. B. Weder, J. Barzen, F. Leymann, and D. Vietz, “Quantum Software Development Lifecycle,” Jun. 2021, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2106.09323.

42. A. A. Khan et al., “Software Architecture for Quantum Computing Systems -- A Systematic Review,” Feb. 2022, Accessed: Mar. 18, 2023. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.05505

43. M. De Stefano, F. Pecorelli, D. Di Nucci, F. Palomba, and A. De Lucia, “Software Engineering for Quantum Programming: How Far Are We?,” Mar. 2022, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2203.16969.

44. M. A. Serrano, J. A. Cruz-Lemus, R. Perez-Castillo, and M. Piattini, “Quantum Software Components and Platforms: Overview and Quality Assessment,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 55, no. 8, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1145/3548679.

45. M. Piattini and J. M. Murillo, “Quantum Software Engineering Landscape and Challenges,” in Quantum Software Engineering, M. A. Serrano, R. Pérez-Castillo, and M. Piattini, Eds., Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 25–38. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-05324-5_2.

46. M. Openja, M. M. Morovati, L. An, F. Khomh, and M. Abidi, “Technical debts and faults in open-source quantum software systems: An empirical study,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 193, p. 111458, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2022.111458.

47. S. Singh, M. T. Pandian, A. K. Aggarwal, S. P. Awasthi, H. Bhardwaj, and J. Pruthi, “Quantum learning theory: A classical perspective for quantum image,” Mater Today Proc, vol. 80, pp. 2786–2793, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.07.039.

48. G. Arun and V. Mishra, “A review on quantum computing and communication,” in 2014 2nd International Conference on Emerging Technology Trends in Electronics, Communication and Networking, 2014, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/ET2ECN.2014.7044953.

49. J. Singh and M. Singh, “Evolution in Quantum Computing,” in 2016 International Conference System Modeling & Advancement in Research Trends (SMART), 2016, pp. 267–270. doi: 10.1109/SYSMART.2016.7894533.

50. S. Aralikatti, “Quantum Computing: Challenges and Opportunities,” in 2021 Fourth International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Communication Technologies (ICECCT), 2021, pp. 1–4. doi: 10.1109/ICECCT52121.2021.9616647.

51. M. Dickson, “NON-RELATIVISTIC QUANTUM MECHANICS,” in Philosophy of Physics, J. Butterfield and J. Earman, Eds., Amsterdam: North-Holland, 2007, pp. 275–415. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044451560-5/50007-5.

52. B. Sodhi and R. Kapur, “Quantum Computing Platforms: Assessing the Impact on Quality Attributes and SDLC Activities,” in 2021 IEEE 18th International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA), 2021, pp. 80–91. doi: 10.1109/ICSA51549.2021.00016.

53. J. Bub, “Quantum Mechanics as a Principle Theory,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 75–94, 2000, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1355-2198(99)00032-5.

54. J. Hilgevoord, “The uncertainty principle for energy and time,” Am J Phys, vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 1451–1456, Dec. 1996, doi: 10.1119/1.18410.

55. J. Hilgevoord, “The uncertainty principle for energy and time. II,” Am J Phys, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 396–402, May 1998, doi: 10.1119/1.18880.

56. E. Sakai, “On the principles of quantum mechanics,” May 2004, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0405069.

57. D. J. Velleman, “Probability and quantum mechanics,” Am J Phys, vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 967–969, Nov. 1998, doi: 10.1119/1.19007.

58. W. B. Hodge, S. V Migirditch, and W. C. Kerr, “Electron spin and probability current density in quantum mechanics,” Am J Phys, vol. 82, no. 7, pp. 681–690, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1119/1.4868094.

59. L. Masanes, T. D. Galley, and M. P. Müller, “The measurement postulates of quantum mechanics are operationally redundant,” Nat Commun, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 1361, 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09348-x.

60. D. Bacon, “Decoherence, Control, and Symmetry in Quantum Computers,” May 2003, Accessed: Mar. 20, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0305025

61. S. Popescu, “Nonlocality beyond quantum mechanics,” Nat Phys, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 264–270, 2014, doi: 10.1038/nphys2916.

62. N. C. Jones et al., “Layered Architecture for Quantum Computing,” Phys Rev X, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 31007, Jul. 2012, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.2.031007.

63. D. Fortunato, J. CAMPOS, and R. ABREU, “Mutation Testing of Quantum Programs: A Case Study With Qiskit,” IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 1–17, 2022, doi: 10.1109/TQE.2022.3195061.

64. R. Van Meter and M. Oskin, “Architectural implications of quantum computing technologies,” ACM Journal on Emerging Technologies in Computing Systems (JETC), vol. 2, pp. 31–63, 2006.

65. A. G. Jordan, “Frontiers of research and future directions in information and communication technology,” Technol Soc, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 388–396, 2008, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2008.05.002.

66. C. A. Perez-Delgado and H. G. Perez-Gonzalez, “Towards a Quantum Software Modeling Language,” Jun. 2020, Accessed: Mar. 18, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.16690

67. P. W. Shor, “Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring,” Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 124–134, 1994.

68. L. Zhao, C. A. Pérez-Delgado, and J. F. Fitzsimons, “Fast graph operations in quantum computation,” Phys Rev A (Coll Park), vol. 93, no. 3, p. 032314, Mar. 2016, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.93.032314.

69. C. A. Pérez-Delgado, “A Quantum Software Modeling Language,” in Quantum Software Engineering, M. A. Serrano, R. Pérez-Castillo, and M. Piattini, Eds., Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 103–119. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-05324-5_6.

70. J. A. Miszczak, High-level Structures in Quantum Computing. Springer Cham, 2012.

71. B. Heim et al., “Quantum programming languages,” Nature Reviews Physics, vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 709–722, 2020, doi: 10.1038/s42254-020-00245-7.

72. O. Ayoade, P. Rivas, and J. Orduz, “Artificial Intelligence Computing at the Quantum Level,” Data (Basel), vol. 7, no. 3, p. 28, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.3390/data7030028.

73. A. García de la Barrera, I. García-Rodríguez de Guzmán, M. Polo, and M. Piattini, “Quantum software testing: State of the art,” Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, vol. n/a, no. n/a, p. e2419, Dec. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2419.

74. M. Paltenghi, “Cross-Platform Testing of Quantum Computing Platforms,” in 2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion), 2022, pp. 269–271. doi: 10.1145/3510454.3517061.

75. N. Costa, J. P. Fernandes, and R. Abreu, “Asserting the Correctness of Shor Implementations Using Metamorphic Testing,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Quantum Programming for Software Engineering, in QP4SE 2022. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, pp. 32–36. doi: 10.1145/3549036.3562062.

76. D. Fortunato, J. Campos, and R. Abreu, “QMutPy: A Mutation Testing Tool for Quantum Algorithms and Applications in Qiskit,” in Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, in ISSTA 2022. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, pp. 797–800. doi: 10.1145/3533767.3543296.

77. J. Wang, Q. Zhang, G. H. Xu, and M. Kim, “QDiff: Differential Testing of Quantum Software Stacks,” in 2021 36th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), 2021, pp. 692–704. doi: 10.1109/ASE51524.2021.9678792.

78. S. Honarvar, M. R. Mousavi, and R. Nagarajan, “Property-Based Testing of Quantum Programs in Q#,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops, in ICSEW’20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, pp. 430–435. doi: 10.1145/3387940.3391459.

79. X. Wang, P. Arcaini, T. Yue, and S. Ali, “QuSBT: Search-Based Testing of Quantum Programs,” in Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings, in ICSE ’22. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, pp. 173–177. doi: 10.1145/3510454.3516839.

80. M. Trinca, J. F. Ferreira, and R. Abreu, “A Preliminary Study on Generating Well-Formed Q# Quantum Programs for Fuzz Testing,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW), 2022, pp. 118–121. doi: 10.1109/ICSTW55395.2022.00033.

81. J. Campos and A. Souto, “QBugs: A Collection of Reproducible Bugs in Quantum Algorithms and a Supporting Infrastructure to Enable Controlled Quantum Software Testing and Debugging Experiments,” in 2021 IEEE/ACM 2nd International Workshop on Quantum Software Engineering (Q-SE), 2021, pp. 28–32. doi: 10.1109/Q-SE52541.2021.00013.

82. D. Fortunato, J. Campos, and R. Abreu, “Mutation Testing of Quantum Programs Written in QISKit,” in 2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion), 2022, pp. 358–359. doi: 10.1145/3510454.3528649.

83. D. Zhu, S. Wang, J. Han, R. Wei, J. Wu, and L. Song, “Research on method for adding new friends to instant messaging system based on SIP in quantum communication network,” in 2015 6th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), 2015, pp. 467–469. doi: 10.1109/ICSESS.2015.7339098.

84. J. Wang et al., “QuanFuzz: Fuzz Testing of Quantum Program,” ArXiv, vol. abs/1810.10310, 2018.

85. V. V Kornyak, “Dynamic Simulation of Quantum Entanglement in Finite Quantum Mechanics: A Computer Algebra Approach,” Programming and Computer Software, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 124–132, 2021, doi: 10.1134/S0361768821020067.

86. L. Vives, K. Melendez, and A. Dávila, “ISO/IEC 29110 and Software Engineering Education: A Systematic Mapping Study,” Programming and Computer Software, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 745–755, 2022, doi: 10.1134/S0361768822080229.

87. R. Juárez-Ramírez et al., “How COVID-19 Pandemic affects Software Developers’ Wellbeing, and the Necessity to strengthen Soft Skills,” Programming and Computer Software, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 614–631, 2022, doi: 10.1134/S0361768822080047.