Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication Related

Topics

Quantum Error Correction Fault Tolerance Open Quantum Systems Decoherence

Robustness of QMA against witness noise

arXiv

Authors: Friederike Anna Dziemba

Year

2016

Paper ID

42280

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Using the tool of concatenated stabilizer coding, we prove that the complexity class QMA remains unchanged even if every witness qubit is disturbed by constant noise. This result may not only be relevant for physical implementations of verifying protocols but also attacking the relationship between the complexity classes QMA, QCMA and BQP, which can be reformulated in this unified framework of a verifying protocol receiving a disturbed witness. While QCMA and BQP are described by fully dephasing and depolarizing channels on the witness qubits, respectively, our result proves QMA to be robust against 27% dephasing and 18% depolarizing noise.

Why This Paper Matters

This paper contributes to the Quantum Error Correction & Fault Tolerance research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
It adds a 2016 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
Using the tool of concatenated stabilizer coding, we prove that the complexity class QMA remains unchanged even if every witness qubit is disturbed by constant noise.

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.

Become a member Sign in

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

References & Citation Signals

[1] DOI https://doi.org/arXiv:1611.07332 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07332 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07332

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0

Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.