Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing

Entanglement recovery in noisy binary quantum information protocols via three-qubit quantum error correction codes

arXiv
Authors: Alessio Morea, Michele N. Notarnicola, Stefano Olivares

Year

2022

Paper ID

6651

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

127

Citations

N/A

Abstract

The task of preserving entanglement against noises is of crucial importance for both quantum communication and quantum information transfer. To this aim, quantum error correction (QEC) codes may be employed to compensate, at least partially, the detriments induced by environmental noise that can be modelled as a bit-flip or a phase-flip error channel. In this paper we investigate the effects of the simple three-qubit QEC codes to restore entanglement and nonlocality in a two-qubit system and consider two practical applications: superdense coding and quantum teleportation. Though the considered three-qubit QEC codes are known to perfectly work in the presence of very small noise, we show that they can avoid the sudden death of entanglement and improve the performance of the addressed protocols also for larger noise amplitudes.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2022 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • The task of preserving entanglement against noises is of crucial importance for both quantum communication and quantum information transfer.

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 #6651

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.