Investigating students’ strategies for interpreting quantum states in an upper-division quantum computing course

Abstract

Significant focus in the PER community has been paid to student reasoning in undergraduate quantum mechanics. However, these same topics have remained largely unexplored in the context of emerging interdisciplinary quantum information science (QIS) courses. We conducted 15 exploratory think-aloud interviews with students in an upper-division quantum computing course at a large R1 university cross-listed in the physics and computer science departments. Focusing on responses to one particular problem, we identify two notably consistent problem-solving strategies across students in the context of a particular interview prompt, which we term Naive Measurement Probabilities (NMP) and Virtual Quantum Computer (VQC), respectively. Operating from a resources framework, we interpret these strategies as choices of coherent (and potentially mutually-generative) sets of resources to employ and available actions to perform.

Investigating student interpretations of the differences between classical and quantum computers: Are quantum computers just analog classical computers?

“…Diana's framing of the difference between a quantum computer and a classical computer as primarily an analog vs. digital one indeed suggests a potential interpretation in terms of a resources framework [25] -analogous to our prior findings regarding student interpretation of quantum states in Ref. [24] -though more work is needed to substantiate this claim. It seems plausible that Diana continued to persist in her original explanation because the resource of entanglement had not yet been activated and she was thinking solely of properties of individual qubits.…”

“…Recognizing this gap, we are conducting an ongoing study of student reasoning in upper-division and graduate quantum information and computing courses at a large R1 research university. In previous work, we identified student strategies for interpreting quantum states in an upper-division quantum computing course [24]. This second paper presents preliminary findings on a distinct topic: student interpretations of the difference between quantum and classical computers.…”

“…Ref. [24]). The final portion of the interview protocol -which includes the questions discussed in this paper -followed a more open-ended approach intended to explore student reasoning.…”

The interdisciplinary quantum information classroom: Themes from a survey of quantum information science instructors

“…Marshman and Singh [20] contextualize student difficulties in quantum mechanics by noting that students enter quantum mechanics courses with different backgrounds and levels of preparation, and that the process of learning quantum mechanics requires a Kuhnian [21] "paradigm shift" away from the 'realist' worldview of classical mechanics that often takes place in an incomplete or piecemeal fashion, an analysis that likely carries over to the context of the QIS classroom. Recent work from our group has built upon these foundations to study student reasoning in quantum computing contexts specifically [22].…”

Ethics education in the quantum information science classroom: Exploring attitudes, barriers, and opportunities

“…Early research in physics and engineering education focused on identifying ways to teach quantum mechanics to computer scientists and engineers for quantum information applications [9], [10]. More recent work has sought to present a portrait of QIS education as it exists today [11] - [14] and to study student reasoning in QIS courses [15]. Beyond DBER, specific ethics issues related to quantum technology and its applications have also been discussed extensively in the literature [16] - [22]; however, these studies typically examine QIS ethics from the researcher or policymaker's perspective rather than the educator's.…”