Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Simulation
The axiomatic and the operational approaches to resource theories of magic do not coincide
arXiv
Authors: Arne Heimendahl, Markus Heinrich, David Gross
Year
2020
Paper ID
19061
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
215
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Stabiliser operations occupy a prominent role in fault-tolerant quantum computing. They are defined operationally: by the use of Clifford gates, Pauli measurements and classical control. These operations can be efficiently simulated on a classical computer, a result which is known as the Gottesman-Knill theorem. However, an additional supply of magic states is enough to promote them to a universal, fault-tolerant model for quantum computing. To quantify the needed resources in terms of magic states, a resource theory of magic has been developed. Stabiliser operations (SO) are considered free within this theory, however they are not the most general class of free operations. From an axiomatic point of view, these are the completely stabiliser-preserving (CSP) channels, defined as those that preserve the convex hull of stabiliser states. It has been an open problem to decide whether these two definitions lead to the same class of operations. In this work, we answer this question in the negative, by constructing an explicit counter-example. This indicates that recently proposed stabiliser-based simulation techniques of CSP maps are strictly more powerful than Gottesman-Knill-like methods. The result is analogous to a well-known fact in entanglement theory, namely that there is a gap between the operationally defined class of local operations and classical communication (LOCC) and the axiomatically defined class of separable channels.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Stabiliser operations occupy a prominent role in fault-tolerant quantum computing.
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.