Quantum parallelism of the controlled-NOT operation: An experimental criterion for the evaluation of device performance

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 72, Issue 2, 2005, Pages

  Hofmann, Holger F ^a  

^a HIROSHIMA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEVICE PERFORMANCE; QUANTUM PARALLELISM;

FUNCTIONS; QUANTUM THEORY;

ATOMIC PHYSICS;

EID: 27144556659     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.022329     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. For an overview, see M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 2000). Quantum computation is discussed in Chap., and the role of the controlled-NOT operation as a universal gate is discussed in Sec. 4.5.
2. Y. A. Pashkin, T. Yamamoto, O. Astafiev, Y. Nakamura, D. V. Averin, and J. S. Tsai, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature01365 421, 823 (2003).
3. F. Schmidt-Kaler, H. Ha4ffner, M. Riebe, S. Gulde, G. P. T. Lancaster, T. Deuschle, C. Becher, C. F. Roos, J. Eschner, and R. Blatt, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature01494 422, 408 (2003).
4. D. Leibfried, B. DeMarco, V. Meyer, D. Lucas, M. Barret, J. Britton, W. M. Itano, B. Jelenkovic, C. Langer, T. Rosenband, and D. J. Wineland, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature01492 422, 412 (2003).
5. J. L. Obrien, G. J. Pryde, A. G. White, T. C. Ralph, and D. Branning, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature02054 426, 264 (2003).
6. Y.-F. Huang, X.-F. Ren, Y.-S. Zhang, L.-M. Duan, and G.-C. Guo, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.240501 93, 240501 (2004).
7. Z. Zhao, A.-N. Zhang, Y.-A. Chen, H. Zhang, J.-F. Du, T. Yang, and J.-W. Pan, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.030501 94, 030501 (2005).
8. J. F. Poyatos, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.390 78, 390 (1997).
9. I. L. Chuang and M. A. Nielsen, J. Mod. Opt. JMOPEW 0950-0340 10.1080/095003497152609 44, 2455 (1997).
10. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Ref.), p. 389.
11. J. L. Obrien, G. J. Pryde, A. Gilchrist, D. F. V. James, N. K. Langford, T. C. Ralph, and A. G. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.080502 93, 080502 (2004).
12. Note that the relevance of this exchange of roles between the target and control qubit for specific quantum-computational problems, in particular for the Bernstein-Vazirani problem, has been pointed out by N. D. Mermin (unpublished).
13. R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.40.4277 40, 4277 (1989).
14. In fact, the type of noise represented by Eq. 8 is indeed equivalent to the kind of noise against which the entanglement capability of the gate is least robust, as derived by A. W. Harrow and M. A. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.012308 68, 012308 (2003). The arguments given in that paper therefore provide a formal proof that this noise model is optimal for estimating the minimal entanglement capability of the gate.
15. See, for example, H. F. Hofmann and S. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.032103 68, 032103 (2003);
16. H. F. Hofmann and S. Takeuchi, e-print quant-ph/0305002.