Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing

Efficient quantum Gibbs sampling of stabilizer codes using hybrid computation

arXiv
Authors: Ivan H. C. Shum, Angela Capel

Year

2025

Paper ID

17163

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

98

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We present hybrid Gibbs sampling algorithms for the stabilizer code Hamiltonians of the rotated surface code and the toric code with only local quantum algorithms, using sim L/2 quantum circuit depth to prepare the Gibbs state of the rotated surface code Hamiltonian, and L quantum circuit depth to prepare the Gibbs state of the toric code Hamiltonian, being L the side of the side of the square lattice. We further show that if we allow for non-local gates, the Gibbs state of the periodic 1D Ising model can be prepared in logarithmic depth and linearly many simultaneous measurements.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We present hybrid Gibbs sampling algorithms for the stabilizer code Hamiltonians of the rotated surface code and the toric code with only local quantum algorithms, using sim...

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #17163 #68474 Concentration-Free Quantum Kern... #68470 A fluxonium qubit-based hybrid ... #68469 Pitfalls when tackling the expo... #68467 Hong-Ou-Mandel interference of ...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.