DOCSLIB.ORG

I I Mladen Paviˇci´C: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — Page 331 — Le-Tex I I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I I Mladen Paviˇci´C: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — Page 331 — Le-Tex I I i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 331 — le-tex i i 331 Index a – nuclear 258 A-gate 218 – quantum number 258 abacus 10 – total 258 adiabatic passage 255 annihilation Adleman, Leonard 22 – operator 195 AlGaAs 223 anti-diagonally polarized photon 53 algorithm anti-Hermitian – Bernstein–Vazirani 286 –operator 43 – Deutsch–Jozsa 284 anti-Stokes – exponential speedup 286 – photon 265 – Deutsch’s 282 Antikythera mechanism 10 –eigenvalue argument – exponential speedup 293 –bit 27 – exponential time 293 astrolabe 10 – Euclid’s 288 atom –feasible 20 – interference 269 – field sieve 22, 287 atom–cavity – general number field sieve 155 – coupling 252, 256, 273 – GNFS 155, 287 – constant 256 – Grover’s 19, 293 atomic –intractable 20 – dipole matrix element 198 – Shor’s 19, 157, 214, 287, 288 – ensemble 262 – all optical 192 auxiliary qubit 181 – exponential speedup 288 axis – exponential time 288 –fast 53 – NMR 214, 287, 290 –slow 53 – Simon’s 287 – exponential speedup 287 b – subexponential 22 B92 165 Alice 81 B92 protocol 170, 171 – classical 141, 152 balanced function 282 – quantum 160 bandwidth 16 alkali-metal atoms 257 Bardeen all-optical 176 – John 236 analog computer 12 basis ancilla 103, 138, 146, 181 – computational 34 angular BB84 protocol 167, 170 – momentum BBN Technologies 157 – electron 215 BBO crystal 55 Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication, First Edition. M. Paviˇci´c. © 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Published 2013 by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. i i i i i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 332 — le-tex i i 332 Index beam splitter c –BS 14 Calderbank–Shor–Steane code 144 – polarization-nonpreserving 71 carrier frequency 203 – polarization-preserving 71 carry 151 – polarizing 57, 260 carry bit 152 Bell cavity 37, 256 –inequality 77 – dark state 257 – state 64–66 – optical 252 – preparation 81 – spherical mirror 253 Bennett–Brassard protocol 167 – QED 176 Bernstein–Vazirani algorithm 286 CC-Uˆ gate biexciton 225 – quantum 138 bit 7 CCNOT –argument 27 –gate 28 – control 27 CCNOT gate –garbage 27 – quantum 145 – parity 141 cesium 257 – quantum 34 charge –result 27 – measurements 220 –sink 27 check matrix 143 –source 27 chip –target 27 –optical –train – integrated 192 – Kane computer 221 Chuang bit-flip 141 – Isaac 188 – correction 148 Church thesis 2 – quantum 144 Church’s general recursiveness 3 Bletchley Park 1 Cirac–Zoller phase gate 192, 230, 248, 306 blue sideband frequency 203 circuit Bob 81 – classical – classical 152 – reversible 138 – quantum 160 – entanglement 140 Bohm – quantum 145–147, 149, 206, 284, 289 – David 303 – diagram 289 Bohr circularly polarized photon 52 – magneton 233 classical –Niels 97 – Alice 141 Boltzmann cloning –entropy 26 –aqubit 94 Bomba 1 – no, theorem 109 Bombes 1 cluster state 300 Boolean – continuous variable 306 – algebra 3, 4, 6 CNOT – lattice model of classical logic 8 –operator 49 –logic 6 CNOT gate 28, 49, 140, 180 –operations 6 – destructive 183 bra 37 – f- 282 bra-ket notation 14 – full 186 broadcasting – interaction-free 266 – no, theorem 109 – pseudo 266 BS – quantum 138 – beam splitter 14 – ion trap 204 – semitransparent mirror 14 – Kane 221, 222 i i i i i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 333 — le-tex i i Index 333 – NMR 214 – Doppler 194 – silicon-based spin 221, 222 – Sisyphus 202 code 142 Cooper codeword 142 – Leon Neil 236 coding – pair 237 –dense 85 – box 240 –superdense 85 Cooper-pair – controlled 89 – number operator 242 coherence 54 coprime 288 collection efficiency 178, 251 correction communication – bit-flip 148 – quantum coset 172 – deterministic 161 counterfactual commutator 40 – measurement 110 complement 6 – reasoning 110 complementary subspace 44 counting rods complexities 17 – Chinese 10 – computational 19 coupler complexity – fiber 170 –class 18 coupling constant 214 – computational 19 creation –oforderO(f(n)) 21 – operator 195 – subexponential 22, 156, 287 critical – superpolynomial 22, 287 – Kochen–Specker set 120 computation cryptography – one-way 298 – interaction-free 280 –physical 17 – quantum 157, 167 –time 19 – continuous variables 177 computational – deterministic 161 –basis 34 – entangled pairs 177 condensation – free space transmission 177 – superconducting 236 – interaction-free 280 conjunction 6 – phase-coding 170 contextuality – roadmap 177 – quantum 110 – single-photon sources 177, 178 continued fraction expansion 292 – weak laser pulses 177 continuous variable crystal – cluster state 306 – BBO 55 continuous variable computation 302 – birefringent 53 continuous wave laser 16 –KDP 55 control –uniaxial 53 –bit 27 CSS code 144 – qubit 135, 138 CW laser 16 control mode 162 CZ 192 controlled-controlled-NOT gate CZ gate 192, 230, 248, 306 – quantum 145 controlled-controlled-Û gate d – quantum 138 dark controlled-NOT gate – counts 178 – quantum 138 – state 255–257 controlled superdense coding 89 – cavity 257 cooling – mixing angle 255 –laser – teleportation 257 i i i i i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 334 — le-tex i i 334 Index DARPA quantum network 158 edge 20 Decidable theories 3 eigenbra 44 decoherence 175 eigenket 44 decomposition of unity 45 eigenvalue 44, 293 decoy – algorithm – pulse 178 – exponential speedup 293 delay – exponential time 293 – gate 152 eigenvector 44, 293 demand Einstein – photons on 178 –Albert 77 dense coding 85 – “element of physical reality” 77 density operator 47 Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen 303 destructive CNOT gate 183 – Gedankenexperiment (EPR) 78 deterministic Ekert protocol 165 – quantum electric dipole moment 256 – communication 161 electric field vector 51 – cryptography 161 electron Deutsch–Jozsa algorithm 284 –angular – exponential speedup 286 – momentum 215 Deutsch’s algorithm 282 –magnetic diagonally polarized photon 52 – moment 215 diode laser 177 –single dipole – transistor 220 – approximation 197, 199 – spin 215 –matrixelement electron commutation relations 199 – atomic 198 emission, spontaneous 54 –moment encoder – electric 256 – gate 186 direct product 40 – quantum 183 discrete Fourier transform 281 – quantum 182 disjunction 6 encoding distributivity 9 – quantum 182 DiVincenzo entangled – Criteria 176 –photons 50 – D. 231 – state 65, 140, 147 DLCZ protocol 262 – on demand 204 donor entanglement – phosphorus 218 – circuit 140 Doppler cooling 194 – swapping 262, 263 Doppler laser cooling 194 entropy 26 dot –Boltzmann 26 – quantum 179 EPR (Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen) 78, 303 down-conversion error – parametric 55 – correction –type-I 55 – classical 141 –type-II 56 – Hadamard gate 145 Duan–Lukin–Cirac–Zoller protocol 262 – quantum 144 dyad 40 – weight 143 Euclid’s algorithm 288 e Euler tour 20 Earnshaw’s theorem 193 Eve 81 eavesdropping – quantum 167 – quantum 167 evolution operator 130 i i i i i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 335 — le-tex i i Index 335 exciton 223, 225 free space transmission – state 226 – cryptography exponential – quantum 177 – matrix 134 Frege – speedup – Gottlob 4 – Deutsch–Jozsa algorithm 286 frequency – eigenvalue algorithm 293 –angular 51 – Shor’s algorithm 288 –ofawave 51 – Simon’s algorithm 287 full –time – adder 151 – eigenvalue algorithm 293 – CNOT gate 186 – Shor’s algorithm 288 EXPTIME 19 g extraordinary ray 166 GaAs 223 GaInP 224 f garbage f-CNOT gate 282 –bit 27 factoring a number 287 gas factoring number 17 – van der Waals 296 false (0, ?)6 fan-out gate 6 –gate 30 – A 218 fault-tolerant computation 149 –AND 7 feasible – CCNOT 28 – algorithm 20 – classical 6 –problem 20 – CNOT 28, 49, 140 Fermi – destructive 183 – operator 200 – full 186 Fert, Albert 225 – interaction-free 266 Feynman – ion trap 204 – Richard 28 – Kane 221, 222 fiber 191 – NMR 214 – coupler 170 – quantum 138 fictitious magnetic – silicon-based spin 221, 222 –dipole – CZ 192, 230, 248, 306 – ion trap 200 – delay 152 –field – encoder 186 – ion trap 200 – quantum 183 field –fan-out 30 – sieve algorithm 287 –Fredkin 27 Field Sieve algorithm 22 – H 132 flip – Hadamard 81, 132, 248, 283, 285, 292 – parity 304 – ion trap 203 – spatial 304 – NMR 213 Fock – J 218, 219 – state –logic 7 – single-photon 178 –operations 7 Fourier transform 10, 292 –symbols 7 – discrete 281 – NMR 213 – quantum 281, 290 – NOT 7, 28, 132 FP7 158 p– ion trap 203 Franson, James D. 180 – NOT 132 Fredkin –OR 7 –gate 27 – parity check 180 i i i i i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 336 — le-tex i i 336 Index – phase 132, 230, 248 – distance 142 – phase shift 132 – rule 142 – quantum 6, 222 – scheme 142 – rotation 132 harmonic oscillator 195 – S 132, 221 – Hamiltonian 195 – Toffoli 28, 138 Heisenberg microscope 270 –universal Hermitian – quantum 136 –matrix 43 – X 132 –operator 43 –XNOR 7 hexagon – Y 132 – lattice model of classical logic 8 – Z 132 Hilbert gcd 288 –David 4 general number field sieve algorithm –program 4 155, 287 Holevo limit 165 generator home qubit 161 – rotation gate 133 Hong–Ou–Mandel dip 90, 304 giant magnetoresistance 225 HWP (half-wave plate) 80 Ginzburg hyperfine interaction 215, 218, 258 – Vitaly 237 hyperfine structure 36 GNFS algorithm 155, 287 hypergraph 20, 115 Goldberg–Vaidman protocol 165 – MMP 116 Gottesman Hänsch, T.W. 194 – Daniel 188 i graph 20 identity operator 40, 130 – state 306 idler 55 greatest common divisor 288 idQuantique 157 Grover’s algorithm 19, 293 inconsistent mathematics
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Superdense Teleportation and Quantum Key Distribution for Space Applications
    2015 IEEE International Conference on Space Optical Systems and Applications (ICSOS) Superdense Teleportation and Quantum Key Distribution for Space Applications Trent Graham, Christopher Zeitler, Joseph Chapman, Hamid Javadi Paul Kwiat Submillimeter Wave Advanced Technology Group Department of Physics Jet Propulsion Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign California Institute of Technology Urbana, USA Pasadena, USA tgraham2@illinois. edu Herbert Bernstein Institute for Science & Interdisciplinary Studies & School of Natural Sciences Hampshire College Amherst, USA Abstract—The transfer of quantum information over long for long periods of time (as would be needed for large scale distances has long been a goal of quantum information science quantum repeaters) and cannot be amplified without and is required for many important quantum communication introducing error [ 6 ] and thus can be very difficult to and computing protocols. When these channels are lossy and distribute over large distances using conventional noisy, it is often impossible to directly transmit quantum states communication techniques. Despite current limitations, some between two distant parties. We use a new technique called quantum communication protocols have already been superdense teleportation to communicate quantum demonstrated over long-distances in terrestrial experiments. information deterministically with greatly reduced resources, Notably, quantum teleportation (a remote quantum state simplified measurements, and decreased classical transfer protocol),
    [Show full text]
  • (CST Part II) Lecture 14: Fault Tolerant Quantum Computing
    Quantum Computing (CST Part II) Lecture 14: Fault Tolerant Quantum Computing The history of the universe is, in effect, a huge and ongoing quantum computation. The universe is a quantum computer. Seth Lloyd 1 / 21 Resources for this lecture Nielsen and Chuang p474-495 covers the material of this lecture. 2 / 21 Why we need fault tolerance Classical computers perform complicated operations where bits are repeatedly \combined" in computations, therefore if an error occurs, it could in principle propagate to a huge number of other bits. Fortunately, in modern digital computers errors are so phenomenally unlikely that we can forget about this possibility for all practical purposes. Errors do, however, occur in telecommunications systems, but as the purpose of these is the simple transmittal of some information, it suffices to perform error correction on the final received data. In a sense, quantum computing is the worst of both of these worlds: errors do occur with significant frequency, and if uncorrected they will propagate, rendering the computation useless. Thus the solution is that we must correct errors as we go along. 3 / 21 Fault tolerant quantum computing set-up For fault tolerant quantum computing: We use encoded qubits, rather than physical qubits. For example we may use the 7-qubit Steane code to represent each logical qubit in the computation. We use fault tolerant quantum gates, which are defined such thata single error in the fault tolerant gate propagates to at most one error in each encoded block of qubits. By a \block of qubits", we mean (for example) each block of 7 physical qubits that represents a logical qubit using the Steane code.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:Quant-Ph/9705031V3 26 Aug 1997 Eddt Rvn Unu Optrfo Crashing
    CALT-68-2112 QUIC-97-030 quant-ph/9705031 Reliable Quantum Computers John Preskill1 California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA Abstract 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 errors 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 106 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. 1 The golden age of quantum error correction Many of us are hopeful that quantum computers will become practical and useful computing devices some time during the 21st century. It is probably fair to say, though, that none of us can now envision exactly what the hardware of that machine of the future will be like; surely, it will be much different than the sort of hardware that experimental physicists are investigating these days. But of one thing we can be quite confident—that a practical quantum computer will incorporate some type of error correction into its operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Superdense Coding Ch.4.4 No Cloning Ch.4.2
    C/CS/PhysC191 SuperdenseCoding,NoCloning 9/15/07 Fall 2009 Lecture 6 1 Readings Benenti, Casati, and Strini: Superdense Coding Ch.4.4 No Cloning Ch.4.2 2 Superdense Coding Super dense coding is the less popular sibling of teleportation. It can actually be viewed as the process in reverse. The idea is to transmit two classical bits of information by only sending one quantum bit. The process starts out with an EPR pair that is shared between the sender (Alice) and receiver (Bob). ψ = 1 00 + 11 √2 The first qubit is Alice’s, the second is Bob’s. Alice wants to send a two bit message to Bob, e.g., 00, 01, 10, or 11. She first performs a single qubit operation on her qubit which transforms the EPR pair according to which message she wants to send: • for a message 00: Alice applies I (i.e., does nothing) • for a message 01: Alice applies X • for a message 10: Alice applies Z • for a message 11: Alice applies iY (i.e. both X and Z) + + + This transforms the EPR pair φ into the four Bell (EPR) states φ , φ − , ψ , and ψ− , respec- tively: 1 1 0 0 • 00: 1 00 + 11 1 00 + 11 = 1 0 1 √2 −→ √2 √2 0 1 0 0 1 1 • 01: 1 00 + 11 1 10 + 01 = 1 1 0 √2 −→ √2 √2 1 0 1 1 0 0 • 10: 1 00 + 11 1 00 11 = 1 0 1 √2 −→ √2 − √2 0 − 1 − C/CS/Phys C191, Fall 2009, Lecture 6 1 0 0 i 1 • 11: i − 1 00 + 11 1 01 10 = 1 i 0 √2 −→ √2 − √2 1 − 0 The key to super-dense coding is that these four Bell states are orthonormal and are hence distinguishable by a quantum measurement, in this case a two-qubit measurement made by Bob.
    [Show full text]
  • LI-DISSERTATION-2020.Pdf
    FAULT-TOLERANCE ON NEAR-TERM QUANTUM COMPUTERS AND SUBSYSTEM QUANTUM ERROR CORRECTING CODES A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty By Muyuan Li In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Computational Science and Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology May 2020 Copyright c Muyuan Li 2020 FAULT-TOLERANCE ON NEAR-TERM QUANTUM COMPUTERS AND SUBSYSTEM QUANTUM ERROR CORRECTING CODES Approved by: Dr. Kenneth R. Brown, Advisor Department of Electrical and Computer Dr. C. David Sherrill Engineering School of Chemistry and Biochemistry Duke University Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Edmond Chow Dr. Richard Vuduc School of Computational Science and School of Computational Science and Engineering Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. T.A. Brian Kennedy Date Approved: March 19, 2020 School of Physics Georgia Institute of Technology I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. R. P. Feynman To my family and my friends. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Ken Brown, who has guided me through my graduate studies with his patience, wisdom, and generosity. He has always been supportive and helpful, and always makes himself available when I needed. I have been constantly inspired by his depth of knowledge in research, as well as his immense passion for life. I would also like to thank my committee members, Professors Edmond Chow, T.A. Brian Kennedy, C. David Sherrill, and Richard Vuduc, for their time and helpful sugges- tions. One half of my graduate career was spent at Georgia Tech and the other half at Duke University.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Progress of Trapped-Ion Processors Towards Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation
    PHYSICAL REVIEW X 7, 041061 (2017) Assessing the Progress of Trapped-Ion Processors Towards Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation A. Bermudez,1,2 X. Xu,3 R. Nigmatullin,4,3 J. O’Gorman,3 V. Negnevitsky,5 P. Schindler,6 T. Monz,6 U. G. Poschinger,7 C. Hempel,8 J. Home,5 F. Schmidt-Kaler,7 M. Biercuk,8 R. Blatt,6,9 S. Benjamin,3 and M. Müller1 1Department of Physics, College of Science, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, United Kingdom 2Instituto de Física Fundamental, IFF-CSIC, Madrid E-28006, Spain 3Department of Materials, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PH, United Kingdom 4Complex Systems Research Group, Faculty of Engineering and IT, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia 5Institute for Quantum Electronics, ETH Zürich, Otto-Stern-Weg 1, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland 6Institute for Experimental Physics, University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria 7Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Staudingerweg 7, 55128 Mainz, Germany 8ARC Centre for Engineered Quantum Systems, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia 9Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria (Received 24 May 2017; revised manuscript received 11 August 2017; published 13 December 2017) A quantitative assessment of the progress of small prototype quantum processors towards fault-tolerant quantum computation is a problem of current interest in experimental and theoretical quantum information science. We introduce a necessary and fair criterion for quantum error correction (QEC), which must be achieved in the development of these quantum processors before their sizes are sufficiently big to consider the well-known QEC threshold.
    [Show full text]
  • Entangled Many-Body States As Resources of Quantum Information Processing
    ENTANGLED MANY-BODY STATES AS RESOURCES OF QUANTUM INFORMATION PROCESSING LI YING A thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy CENTRE FOR QUANTUM TECHNOLOGIES NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2013 DECLARATION I hereby declare that the thesis is my original work and it has been written by me in its entirety. I have duly acknowledged all the sources of information which have been used in the thesis. This thesis has also not been submitted for any degree in any university previously. LI YING 23 July 2013 Acknowledgments I am very grateful to have spent about four years at CQT working with Leong Chuan Kwek. He always brings me new ideas in science and has helped me to establish good collaborative relationships with other scien- tists. Kwek helped me a lot in my life. I am also very grateful to Simon C. Benjamin. He showd me how to do high quality researches in physics. Simon also helped me to improve my writing and presentation. I hope to have fruitful collaborations in the near future with Kwek and Simon. For my project about the ground-code MBQC (Chapter2), I am thank- ful to Tzu-Chieh Wei, Daniel E. Browne and Robert Raussendorf. In one afternoon, Tzu-Chieh showed me the idea of his recent paper in this topic in the quantum cafe, which encouraged me to think about the ground- code MBQC. Dan and Robert have a high level of comprehension on the subject of the MBQC. And we had some very interesting discussions and communications. I am grateful to Sean D.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Zero-Knowledge Arguments for Quantum Computations
    Classical zero-knowledge arguments for quantum computations Thomas Vidick∗ Tina Zhangy Abstract We show that every language in BQP admits a classical-verifier, quantum-prover zero-knowledge ar- gument system which is sound against quantum polynomial-time provers and zero-knowledge for classical (and quantum) polynomial-time verifiers. The protocol builds upon two recent results: a computational zero-knowledge proof system for languages in QMA, with a quantum verifier, introduced by Broadbent et al. (FOCS 2016), and an argument system for languages in BQP, with a classical verifier, introduced by Mahadev (FOCS 2018). 1 Introduction The paradigm of the interactive proof system is a versatile tool in complexity theory. Although traditional complexity classes are usually defined in terms of a single Turing machine|NP, for example, can be defined as the class of languages which a non-deterministic Turing machine is able to decide|many have reformulations in the language of interactive proofs, and such reformulations often inspire natural and fruitful variants on the traditional classes upon which they are based. (The class MA, for example, can be considered a natural extension of NP under the interactive-proof paradigm.) Intuitively speaking, an interactive proof system is a model of computation involving two entities, a verifier and a prover, the former of whom is computationally efficient, and the latter of whom is unbounded but untrusted. The verifier and the prover exchange messages, and the prover attempts to `convince' the verifier that a certain problem instance is a yes-instance. We can define some particular complexity class as the set of languages for which there exists an interactive proof system that 1) is complete, 2) is sound, and 3) has certain other properties which vary depending on the class in question.
    [Show full text]
  • G53NSC and G54NSC Non Standard Computation Research Presentations
    G53NSC and G54NSC Non Standard Computation Research Presentations March the 23rd and 30th, 2010 Tuesday the 23rd of March, 2010 11:00 - James Barratt • Quantum error correction 11:30 - Adam Christopher Dunkley and Domanic Nathan Curtis Smith- • Jones One-Way quantum computation and the Measurement calculus 12:00 - Jack Ewing and Dean Bowler • Physical realisations of quantum computers Tuesday the 30th of March, 2010 11:00 - Jiri Kremser and Ondrej Bozek Quantum cellular automaton • 11:30 - Andrew Paul Sharkey and Richard Stokes Entropy and Infor- • mation 12:00 - Daniel Nicholas Kiss Quantum cryptography • 1 QUANTUM ERROR CORRECTION JAMES BARRATT Abstract. Quantum error correction is currently considered to be an extremely impor- tant area of quantum computing as any physically realisable quantum computer will need to contend with the issues of decoherence and other quantum noise. A number of tech- niques have been developed that provide some protection against these problems, which will be discussed. 1. Introduction It has been realised that the quantum mechanical behaviour of matter at the atomic and subatomic scale may be used to speed up certain computations. This is mainly due to the fact that according to the laws of quantum mechanics particles can exist in a superposition of classical states. A single bit of information can be modelled in a number of ways by particles at this scale. This leads to the notion of a qubit (quantum bit), which is the quantum analogue of a classical bit, that can exist in the states 0, 1 or a superposition of the two. A number of quantum algorithms have been invented that provide considerable improvement on their best known classical counterparts, providing the impetus to build a quantum computer.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:0905.2794V4 [Quant-Ph] 21 Jun 2013 Error Correction 7 B
    Quantum Error Correction for Beginners Simon J. Devitt,1, ∗ William J. Munro,2 and Kae Nemoto1 1National Institute of Informatics 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 101-8340. Japan 2NTT Basic Research Laboratories NTT Corporation 3-1 Morinosato-Wakamiya, Atsugi Kanagawa 243-0198. Japan (Dated: June 24, 2013) Quantum error correction (QEC) and fault-tolerant quantum computation represent one of the most vital theoretical aspect of quantum information processing. It was well known from the early developments of this exciting field that the fragility of coherent quantum systems would be a catastrophic obstacle to the development of large scale quantum computers. The introduction of quantum error correction in 1995 showed that active techniques could be employed to mitigate this fatal problem. However, quantum error correction and fault-tolerant computation is now a much larger field and many new codes, techniques, and methodologies have been developed to implement error correction for large scale quantum algorithms. In response, we have attempted to summarize the basic aspects of quantum error correction and fault-tolerance, not as a detailed guide, but rather as a basic introduction. This development in this area has been so pronounced that many in the field of quantum information, specifically researchers who are new to quantum information or people focused on the many other important issues in quantum computation, have found it difficult to keep up with the general formalisms and methodologies employed in this area. Rather than introducing these concepts from a rigorous mathematical and computer science framework, we instead examine error correction and fault-tolerance largely through detailed examples, which are more relevant to experimentalists today and in the near future.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Information Capacity of Superdense Coding
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CERN Document Server Classical information capacity of superdense coding Garry Bowen∗ Department of Physics, Australian National University, Canberra, A.C.T. 0200, Australia. (February 1, 2001) Classical communication through quantum channels may be enhanced by sharing entanglement. Superdense coding allows the encoding, and transmission, of up to two classical bits of information in a single qubit. In this paper, the maximum classical channel capacity for states that are not maximally entangled is derived. Particular schemes are then shown to attain this capacity, firstly for pairs of qubits, and secondly for pairs of qutrits. 03.67.Hk Quantum information exhibits many features which do ters, then the maximal amount of classical information not have analogues in classical information theory [1]. that may be transferred is given by the Kholevo bound For this reason, when a quantum channel is used for com- [10], munication, there exist a number of different capacities for the different types of information transmitted through C = max S p (U k I )ρ (U k I )y k k A B AB A B the channel [2{5]. fU ;pkg ⊗ ⊗ A " k ! Superdense coding (referred to in this paper simply as X dense coding), first proposed by Bennett and Wiesner [6], k k y pkS (U IB )ρAB(U IB ) : (1) is where the transmission of classical information through − A ⊗ A ⊗ k # a quantum channel is enhanced by shared entanglement X between sender and receiver. The classical information This bound has been shown to be asymptotically attain- capacity for a channel where sender and receiver share able by using product state block coding [8,11].
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Quantum Error Correction
    Schrödinger Cats, Maxwell’s Demon and Quantum Error Correction Experiment Theory Michel Devoret SMG Luigi Frunzio Liang Jiang Rob Schoelkopf Leonid Glazman M. Mirrahimi ** Andrei Petrenko Nissim Ofek Shruti Puri Reinier Heeres Yaxing Zhang Philip Reinhold Victor Albert** Yehan Liu Kjungjoo Noh** Zaki Leghtas Richard Brierley Brian Vlastakis Claudia De Grandi +….. Zaki Leghtas Juha Salmilehto Matti Silveri Uri Vool Huaixui Zheng Marios Michael +….. QuantumInstitute.yale.edu Quantum Error Correction ‘Logical’ qubit Cold bath Entropy ‘Physical’ qubits ‘Physical’ Maxwell N Demon N qubits have errors N times faster. Maxwell demon must overcome this factor of N – and not introduce errors of its own! (or at least not uncorrectable errors) 2 Full Steane Code – Arbitrary Errors Single round of error correction 6 ancillae 7 qubits All previous attempts to overcome the factor of N and reach the ‘break even’ point of QEC have failed. Current industrial approach (IBM, Google, Intel, Rigetti): Scale up, then error correct • Large, complex: o Non-universal (Clifford gates only) o Measurement via many wires o Difficult process tomography • Large part count • Fixed encoding ‘Surface Code’ (readout wires not shown) O’Brien et al. arXiv:1703.04136 predict ‘break-even’ will be difficult even at the 50 qubit scale. 4 All previous attempts to overcome the factor of N and reach the ‘break even’ point of QEC have failed. We need a simpler and better idea... ‘Error correct and then scale up!’ Don’t use material objects as qubits. Use microwave photon states stored
    [Show full text]