Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
2000 character limit reached

Operation fidelity explored by numerical range of Kraus operators (2212.10139v2)

Published 20 Dec 2022 in quant-ph

Abstract: Present-day quantum devices require precise implementation of desired quantum channels. To characterize the quality of implementation one uses the average operation fidelity $F$, defined as the fidelity between an initial pure state and its image with respect to the analyzed operation, averaged over an ensemble of pure states. We analyze statistical properties of the operation fidelity for low-dimensional channels and study its extreme values and probability distribution, both of which can be used for statistical channel discrimination. These results are obtained with help of the joint numerical range of the set of Kraus operators representing a channel. Analytic expressions for the density $P\left(F\right)$ are derived in some particular cases including unitary and mixed unitary channels as well as quantum maps represented by commuting Kraus operators. Measured distributions of operation fidelity can be used to distinguish between two quantum operations.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (52)
  1. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
  2. D. Lidar and T. Brun. Quantum Error Correction. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
  3. Independent state and measurement characterization for quantum computers. Phys. Rev. Research, 3:033285, 2021.
  4. X. Qiu and L. Chen. Quantum Wasserstein distance between unitary operations, 2023.
  5. Fundamental limits to quantum channel discrimination. Npj Quantum Inf., 5:50, 2019.
  6. Discrimination of POVMs with rank-one effects. Quantum Inf. Process., 19:428, 2020.
  7. R. Jozsa. Fidelity for mixed quantum states. J. Mod. Opt., 41:2315–2323, 1994.
  8. Fidelity of single qubit maps. Phys. Lett. A, 294:258–260, 2002.
  9. K. Życzkowski and H.-J. Sommers. Average fidelity between random quantum states. Phys. Rev. A, 71:032313, 2005.
  10. M. A. Nielsen. A simple formula for the average gate fidelity of a quantum dynamical operation. Phys. Lett. A, 303:249–252, 2002.
  11. Gate fidelity fluctuations and quantum process invariants. Phys. Rev. A, 84:012309, 2011.
  12. The distribution of quantum fidelities. Phys. Lett. A, 372:7028–7032, 2008.
  13. E. Magesan. Depolarizing behavior of quantum channels in higher dimensions. Quantum Inf. Comput., 11:0466–0484, 2011.
  14. K. Siudzińska. Regularized maximal fidelity of the generalized Pauli channels. Phys. Rev. A, 99:012340, 2019.
  15. N. Johnston and D. W. Kribs. A family of norms with applications in quantum information theory. J. Math. Phys., 51:082202, 2010.
  16. N. Johnston and D. W. Kribs. A family of norms with applications in quantum information theory II. Quantum Inf. Comput., 11:104–123, 2011.
  17. N. Johnston and D. W. Kribs. Quantum gate fidelity in terms of Choi matrices. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., 44:495303, 2011.
  18. C. Gregor. Construction of unitary matrices and bounding minimal quantum gate fidelity using genetic algorithms, 2018. Master Thesis, University of Guelph.
  19. Optimal strategies for estimating the average fidelity of quantum gates. Phys. Rev. Lett., 111:200401, 2013.
  20. M. F. Ernst and R. Klesse. Regularized maximum pure-state input-output fidelity of a quantum channel. Phys. Rev. A, 96:062319, 2017.
  21. F. F. Bonsall and J. Duncan. Numerical Ranges of Operators on Normed Spaces and of Elements of Normed Algebras. Cambridge University Press, 1971.
  22. Numerical Range, The field of values of linear operators and matrices. Springer, 1997.
  23. T. Gallay and D. Serre. Numerical measure of a complex matrix. Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 65:287–336, 2012.
  24. Numerical shadow and geometry of quantum states. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., 44:335301, 2011.
  25. E. Gutkin and K. Życzkowski. Joint numerical ranges, quantum maps, and joint numerical shadows. Linear Algebra Appl., 438:2394–2404, 2013.
  26. J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok. Geometric perspective on quantum parameter estimation. AVS Quantum Science, 2:014701, 2020.
  27. Exploiting quantum parallelism of entanglement for a  complete experimental quantum characterization of a single-qubit  device. Physical Review A, 67:062307, 2003.
  28. M. Sarovar and G. J. Milburn. Optimal estimation of one-parameter quantum channels. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 39:8487–8505, 2006.
  29. X. T. Liang. Strategies for estimating quantum lossy channels. arXiv:quant-ph/0205121, 2002.
  30. A. Y. Kitaev. Quantum measurements and the Abelian stabilizer problem. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, 3:1–22, 1996.
  31. T. Rudolph and L. Grover. Quantum communication complexity of establishing a shared  reference frame. Physical Review Letters, 91:217905, 2003.
  32. A. Fujiwara and H. Imai. Quantum parameter estimation of a generalized Pauli channel. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 36:8093–8103, 2003.
  33. A. Fujiwara. Estimation of a generalized amplitude-damping channel. Physical Review A, 70:012317, 2004.
  34. Optimal parameter estimation of a depolarizing channel. Physical Review A, 66:022308, 2002.
  35. Optimal quantum channel estimation of two interacting  qubits subject to decoherence. The European Physical Journal D, 68:170, 2014.
  36. Simple optical measurement of the overlap and fidelity of quantum states. Physics Letters A, 310:95–100, 2003.
  37. Quantum algorithm for fidelity estimation. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 69:273–282, 2023.
  38. Variational quantum fidelity estimation. Quantum, 4:248, 2020.
  39. Direct fidelity estimation of quantum states using machine  learning. Physical Review Letters, 127:130503, 2021.
  40. J. ur Rehman and H. Shin. Machine Learning Assisted Quantum Channel Estimation. Proceedings of Conference of Korean Society for Communications, pages 660–661, 2022.
  41. S. T. Flammia and Y. Liu. Direct fidelity estimation from few Pauli measurements. Physical Review Letters, 106:230501, 2011.
  42. Practical characterization of quantum devices without  tomography. Physical Review Letters, 107:210404, 2011.
  43. Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very  few measurements. Nature Physics, 16:1050–1057, 2020.
  44. Sub- and super-fidelity as bounds for quantum fidelity. Quantum Information & Computation, 9:103–130, 2009.
  45. Toolbox for entanglement detection and fidelity estimation. Physical Review A, 76:030305, 2007.
  46. R. Kippenhahn. Über den Wertevorrat einer Matrix. Math. Nachr., 6:193–228, 1951.
  47. I. Bengtsson and K. Życzkowski. Geometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement. Cambridge University Press, 2 edition, 2017.
  48. On the mixed-unitary rank of quantum channels. Commun. Math. Phys., 394:919–951, 2022.
  49. Quantum capacity of a bosonic dephasing channel. Phys. Rev. A, 102:042413, 2020.
  50. Discrimination of dephasing channels. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 55(24):245301, 2022.
  51. Real numerical shadow and generalized B-splines. Linear Algebra Appl., 479:12–51, 2015.
  52. P. Stein. A note on the volume of a simplex. Amer. Math. Monthly, 73:299–301, 1966.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now

Whiteboard

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up for Free