Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing

A polynomial-time classical algorithm for noisy quantum circuits

arXiv
Authors: Thomas Schuster, Chao Yin, Xun Gao, Norman Y. Yao

Year

2024

Paper ID

65268

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

141

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We provide a polynomial-time classical algorithm for noisy quantum circuits. The algorithm computes the expectation value of any observable for any circuit, with a small average error over input states drawn from an ensemble (e.g. the computational basis). Our approach is based upon the intuition that noise exponentially damps non-local correlations relative to local correlations. This enables one to classically simulate a noisy quantum circuit by only keeping track of the dynamics of local quantum information. Our algorithm also enables sampling from the output distribution of a circuit in quasi-polynomial time, so long as the distribution anti-concentrates. A number of practical implications are discussed, including a fundamental limit on the efficacy of noise mitigation strategies: for constant noise rates, any quantum circuit for which error mitigation is efficient on most input states, is also classically simulable on most input states.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We provide a polynomial-time classical algorithm for noisy quantum circuits.

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 #65268

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.