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

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #42992 #78828 Verifiable Sampling for Delegat... #78813 Large-Scale Benchmarking of Qua... #78775 On linearity or non-linearity i...

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.