Progress toward scalable tomography of quantum maps using twirling-based methods and information hierarchies

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 81, Issue 6, 2010, Pages

  López, Cecilia C ^a,b,c   Bendersky, Ariel ^d   Paz, Juan Pablo ^d   Cory, David G ^a,e  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES   (Argentina)

^e PERIMETER INSTITUTE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS; EMERSON; EXISTING METHOD; MATRIX REPRESENTATION; QUANTUM MAPS; QUANTUM PROCESS; QUANTUM PROCESS TOMOGRAPHY; SCALABLE METHODS; USEFUL PROPERTIES;

SCALABILITY;

TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 77953531039     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.81.062113     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. M. A Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000).
2. M. Mohseni, A. T. Rezakhani, and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032322 77, 032322 (2008). (Pubitemid 351416453)
3. J. Emerson, R. Alicki, and K. Życzkowski, J. Opt. B JOBOFD 1464-4266 10.1088/1464-4266/7/10/021 7, S347 (2005). (Pubitemid 41383164)
4. B. Lévi, C. C. López, J. Emerson, and D. G. Cory, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022314 75, 022314 (2007).
5. C. Dankert, R. Cleve, J. Emerson, and E. Livine, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.012304 80, 012304 (2009);
6. e-print arXiv: quant-ph/0606161v1 (2006).
7. J. Emerson, M. Silva, O. Moussa, C. Ryan, M. Laforest, J. Baugh, D. G. Cory, and R. Laflamme, Science SCIEAS 0036-8075 10.1126/science.1145699 317, 1893 (2007). (Pubitemid 47509429)
8. M. Silva, E. Magesan, D. W. Kribs, and J. Emerson, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.78.012347 78, 012347 (2008).
9. A. Bendersky, F. Pastawski, and J. P. Paz, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.190403 100, 190403 (2008). (Pubitemid 351692674)
10. C. C. López, B. Lévi, and D. G. Cory, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.042328 79, 042328 (2009).
11. A. Bendersky, F. Pastawski, and J. P. Paz, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.032116 80, 032116 (2009).
12. C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.3824 54, 3824 (1996).
13. An example of such kind of basis is the one formed by the generalized Pauli operators. However, until Sec. IV we refrain from using a particular basis so our results remain general.
14. A. Shabani and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.100402 102, 100402 (2009).
15. S. Samuel, J. Math. Phys. JMAPAQ 0022-2488 10.1063/1.524386 21, 2695 (1980);
16. P. A. Mello, J. Phys. A JPHAC5 0305-4470 10.1088/0305-4470/23/18/013 23, 4061 (1990);
17. P. W. Brouwer and C. W. J. Beenakker, J. Math. Phys. JMAPAQ 0022-2488 10.1063/1.531667 37, 4904 (1996).
18. J. M. Renes, R. Blume-Kohout, A. J. Scott, and C. M. Caves, J. Math. Phys. JMAPAQ 0022-2488 10.1063/1.1737053 45, 2171 (2004). (Pubitemid 38783053)
19. P. Pechukas, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.73. 1060 73, 1060 (1994);
20. R. Alicki, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3020 75, 3020 (1995);
21. P. Pechukas, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.75. 3021 75, 3021 (1995).
22. H. A. Carteret, D. R. Terno, and K. Życzkowski, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.042113 77, 042113 (2008). (Pubitemid 351561881)
23. D. Gross, K. Audenaert, and J. Eisert, J. Math. Phys. JMAPAQ 0022-2488 10.1063/1.2716992 48, 052104 (2007).
24. C. C. López, Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2009 [http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/51777].
25. C. T. Schmiegelow, M. A. Larotonda, and J. P. Paz, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.123601 104, 123601 (2010).
26. M. A. Nielsen, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/S0375-9601(02) 01272-0 303, 249 (2002).
27. A. Klappenecker and M. Roetteler, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (IEEE, Adelaide, SA, 2005), pp. 1740-1744.
28. D. Gottesman, Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Techonology, 1997
29. e-print arXiv: quant-ph/9705052v1;
30. D. Gottesman, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.1862 54, 1862 (1996).
31. C. Dankert, Master's thesis, University of Waterloo, 2005
32. e-print arXiv: quant-ph/0512217v2.
33. Examples of process tomography using the largest systems in different setups are as follows: (a) with photons, M. W. Mitchell, C. W. Ellenor, S. Schneider, and A. M. Steinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.120402 91, 120402 (2003);
34. J. L. O'Brien, 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); (b) in liquid-state NMR
35. Y. S. Weinstein, T. F. Havel, J. Emerson, N. Boulant, M. Saraceno, and S. Lloyd, J. Chem. Phys. JCPSA6 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1785151 121, 6117 (2004); (c) for the motion of optically trapped atoms
36. S. H. Myrskog, J. K. Fox, M. W. Mitchell, and A. M. Steinberg, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.013615 72, 013615 (2005); (d) with nitrogen vacancy centers (Pubitemid 41492547)
37. M. Howard, J. Twamley, C. Wittmann, T. Gaebel, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/8/3/033 8, 33 (2006); (e) with superconducting qubits
38. M. Neeley, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, M. Hofheinz, N. Katz1, E. Lucero, A. O'Connell, H. Wang, A. N. Cleland, and John M. Martinis, Nature Phys. NJOPFM 1745-2473 10.1038/nphys972 4, 523 (2008);
39. J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. Tornberg, J. Koch, L. S. Bishop, A. A. Houck, B. R. Johnson, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.090502 102, 090502 (2009); (f) with ion traps
40. T. Monz, K. Kim, W. Hänsel, M. Riebe, A. S. Villar, P. Schindler, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.040501 102, 040501 (2009);
41. D. Hanneke, J. P. Home, J. D. Jost, J. M. Amini, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, Nature Phys. PRLTAO 1745-2473 10.1038/nphys1453 6, 13 (2009).
42. / 4 σ p } with p, q = x, y, z generates only half of the Clifford group for one qubit (up to a global phase). Nevertheless, this set of 12 operators is enough to implement the Clifford twirl we need.
43. For example, for w co < n / 2, it is trivial to prove that M co ≤ (w co + 1) (n e / w co) w co. In T. Worsch, Universität Karlsruhe, Fakultät für Informatik, Technical Report No. 31/94, 1994 [http://digbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/volltexte/181894], it is shown that M co ≤ (1 + ε) (√ n / 4 π) (n e / w co) w co, with ε O (1 / n). For a simple case where we find only up to two-body coefficients, then trivially M co = 1 + n + n (n - 1) / 2.
44. M. P. A. Branderhorst, J. Nunn, I. A. Walmsley, and R. L. Kosut, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/11/11/115010 11, 115010 (2009).