Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
'Interaction-Free' Channel Discrimination
arXiv
Authors: Markus Hasenöhrl, Michael M. Wolf
Year
2020
Paper ID
20260
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
177
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In this work, we investigate the question, which objects one can discriminate perfectly by 'interaction-free' measurements. To this end, we interpret the Elitzur-Vaidman bomb-tester experiment as a quantum channel discrimination problem and generalize the notion of 'interaction-free' measurement to arbitrary quantum channels. Our main result is a necessary and sufficient criterion for when it is possible or impossible to discriminate quantum channels in an 'interaction-free' manner (i.e., such that the discrimination error probability and the 'interaction' probability can be made arbitrarily small). For the case where our condition holds, we devise an explicit protocol with the property that both probabilities approach zero with an increasing number of channel uses, N. More specifically, the 'interaction' probability in our protocol decays as frac{1}{N} and we show that this rate is the optimal achievable one. Furthermore, our protocol only needs at most one ancillary qubit and might thus be implementable in near-term experiments. For the case where our condition does not hold, we prove an inequality that quantifies the trade-off between the error probability and the 'interaction' probability.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In this work, we investigate the question, which objects one can discriminate perfectly by 'interaction-free' measurements.
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.