اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدTranslating between the roots of the identity in quantum computers
453
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
The Clifford+$T$ quantum computing gate library for single qubit gates can create all unitary matrices that are generated by the group $langle H, Trangle$. The matrix $T$ can be considered the fourth root of Pauli $Z$, since $T^4 = Z$ or also the eighth root of the identity $I$. The Hadamard matrix $H$ can be used to translate between the Pauli matrices, since $(HTH)^4$ gives Pauli $X$. We are generalizing both these roots of the Pauli matrices (or roots of the identity) and translation matrices to investigate the groups they generate: the so-called Pauli root groups. In this work we introduce a formalization of such groups, study finiteness and infiniteness properties, and precisely determine equality and subgroup relations.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
A quantum computer has now solved a specialized problem believed to be intractable for supercomputers, suggesting that quantum processors may soon outperform supercomputers on scientifically important problems. But flaws in each quantum processor lim
it its capability by causing errors in quantum programs, and it is currently difficult to predict what programs a particular processor can successfully run. We introduce techniques that can efficiently test the capabilities of any programmable quantum computer, and we apply them to twelve processors. Our experiments show that current hardware suffers complex errors that cause structured programs to fail up to an order of magnitude earlier - as measured by program size - than disordered ones. As a result, standard error metrics inferred from random disordered program behavior do not accurately predict performance of useful programs. Our methods provide efficient, reliable, and scalable benchmarks that can be targeted to predict quantum computer performance on real-world problems.
It is imperative that useful quantum computers be very difficult to simulate classically; otherwise classical computers could be used for the applications envisioned for the quantum ones. Perfect quantum computers are unarguably exponentially difficu
lt to simulate: the classical resources required grow exponentially with the number of qubits $N$ or the depth $D$ of the circuit. Real quantum computing devices, however, are characterized by an exponentially decaying fidelity $mathcal{F} sim (1-epsilon)^{ND}$ with an error rate $epsilon$ per operation as small as $approx 1%$ for current devices. In this work, we demonstrate that real quantum computers can be simulated at a tiny fraction of the cost that would be needed for a perfect quantum computer. Our algorithms compress the representations of quantum wavefunctions using matrix product states (MPS), which capture states with low to moderate entanglement very accurately. This compression introduces a finite error rate $epsilon$ so that the algorithms closely mimic the behavior of real quantum computing devices. The computing time of our algorithm increases only linearly with $N$ and $D$. We illustrate our algorithms with simulations of random circuits for qubits connected in both one and two dimensional lattices. We find that $epsilon$ can be decreased at a polynomial cost in computing power down to a minimum error $epsilon_infty$. Getting below $epsilon_infty$ requires computing resources that increase exponentially with $epsilon_infty/epsilon$. For a two dimensional array of $N=54$ qubits and a circuit with Control-Z gates, error rates better than state-of-the-art devices can be obtained on a laptop in a few hours. For more complex gates such as a swap gate followed by a controlled rotation, the error rate increases by a factor three for similar computing time.
When two operators $A$ and $B$ do not commute, the calculation of the exponential operator $e^{A+B}$ is a difficult and crucial problem. The applications are vast and diversified: to name but a few examples, quantum evolutions, product formulas, quan
tum control, Zeno effect. The latter are of great interest in quantum applications and quantum technologies. We present here a historical survey of results and techniques, and discuss differences and similarities. We also highlight the link with the strong coupling regime, via the adiabatic theorem, and contend that the pulsed and continuous formulations differ only in the order by which two limits are taken, and are but two faces of the same coin.
Benchmarking is how the performance of a computing system is determined. Surprisingly, even for classical computers this is not a straightforward process. One must choose the appropriate benchmark and metrics to extract meaningful results. Different
benchmarks test the system in different ways and each individual metric may or may not be of interest. Choosing the appropriate approach is tricky. The situation is even more open ended for quantum computers, where there is a wider range of hardware, fewer established guidelines, and additional complicating factors. Notably, quantum noise significantly impacts performance and is difficult to model accurately. Here, we discuss benchmarking of quantum computers from a computer architecture perspective and provide numerical simulations highlighting challenges which suggest caution.
The new field of quantum error correction has developed spectacularly since its origin less than two years ago. Encoded quantum information can be protected from errors that arise due to uncontrolled interactions with the environment. Recovery from e
rrors can work effectively even if occasional mistakes occur during the recovery procedure. Furthermore, encoded quantum information can be processed without serious propagation of errors. Hence, an arbitrarily long quantum computation can be performed reliably, provided that the average probability of error per quantum gate is less than a certain critical value, the accuracy threshold. A quantum computer storing about 10^6 qubits, with a probability of error per quantum gate of order 10^{-6}, would be a formidable factoring engine. Even a smaller, less accurate quantum computer would be able to perform many useful tasks. (This paper is based on a talk presented at the ITP Conference on Quantum Coherence and Decoherence, 15-18 December 1996.)
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
