Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Simulation Quantum Foundations

Contextuality and Wigner function negativity in qubit quantum computation

arXiv
Authors: Robert Raussendorf, Dan E. Browne, Nicolas Delfosse, Cihan Okay, Juan Bermejo-Vega

Year

2015

Paper ID

25932

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

80

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We describe a scheme of quantum computation with magic states on qubits for which contextuality is a necessary resource possessed by the magic states. More generally, we establish contextuality as a necessary resource for all schemes of quantum computation with magic states on qubits that satisfy three simple postulates. Furthermore, we identify stringent consistency conditions on such computational schemes, revealing the general structure by which negativity of Wigner functions, hardness of classical simulation of the computation, and contextuality are connected.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2015 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We describe a scheme of quantum computation with magic states on qubits for which contextuality is a necessary resource possessed by the magic states.

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 #25932 #78846 Analog quantum simulation of Sh... #78817 Modelling Josephson Junctions w... #78814 Construction of isoscattering n... #78811 Autonomous Code Migration for Q...

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.