Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Simulation
Practical Quantum Error Mitigation for Near-Future Applications
arXiv
Authors: Suguru Endo, Simon C. Benjamin, Ying Li
Year
2017
Paper ID
39289
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
156
Citations
N/A
Abstract
It is vital to minimise the impact of errors for near-future quantum devices that will lack the resources for full fault tolerance. Two quantum error mitigation (QEM) techniques have been introduced recently, namely error extrapolation [Li2017,Temme2017] and quasi-probability decomposition [Temme2017]. To enable practical implementation of these ideas, here we account for the inevitable imperfections in the experimentalist's knowledge of the error model itself. We describe a protocol for systematically measuring the effect of errors so as to design efficient QEM circuits. We find that the effect of localised Markovian errors can be fully eliminated by inserting or replacing some gates with certain single-qubit Clifford gates and measurements. Finally, having introduced an exponential variant of the extrapolation method we contrast the QEM techniques using exact numerical simulation of up to 19 qubits in the context of a `SWAP test' circuit. Our optimised methods dramatically reduce the circuit's output error without increasing the qubit count or time requirements.
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.