Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Error Correction Fault Tolerance
Quantum Machine Learning
Fidelity as a figure of merit in quantum error correction
arXiv
Authors: Jonas Almlöf, Gunnar Björk
Year
2016
Paper ID
42992
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
127
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We discuss the fidelity as a figure of merit in quantum error correction schemes. We show that when identifiable but uncorrectable errors occur as a result of the action of the channel, a common strategy that improves the fidelity actually decreases the transmitted mutual information. The conclusion is that while the fidelity is simple to calculate and therefore often used, it is perhaps not always a recommendable figure of merit for quantum error correction. The reason is that while it roughly speaking encourages optimisation of the "mean probability of success", it gives no incentive for a protocol to indicate exactly where the errors lurk. For small error probabilities, the latter information is more important for the integrity of the information than optimising the mean probability of success.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Machine Learning research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2016 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We discuss the fidelity as a figure of merit in quantum error correction schemes.
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.