Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 68 references

Quantum Fidelity Estimation in the Resource Theory of Nonstabilizerness

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The sample complexity of direct fidelity estimation is governed by the target's nonstabilizerness, measured by Wigner rank or mana, with stabilizer targets costing only $O(\varepsilon^{-2}\ln(1/\delta))$ copies.

desk verdict State-side fidelity bounds are solid; the new channel protocols are promising but need the measurement primitive spelled out before the d^n scaling ambiguity can be resolved. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.12938 v1 pith:JDA2Z7RX submitted 2025-06-15 quant-ph

Zhiping Liu , Kun Wang , Xin Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords nonstabilizernessdirectfidelityestimationWignerrankmanaquditdiscretefunctionsamplecomplexitymagicstates
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper establishes that the sample complexity of directly estimating the fidelity of a quantum state or unitary channel is governed by the target's nonstabilizerness—its 'magic' as measured by Wigner rank or mana. For odd-prime-dimensional qudit systems, the authors design protocols that sample phase-space point operators according to an importance distribution derived from the target's Wigner function, and they prove that the number of copies needed grows like $O(2^{\chi_{\log}(\psi)}/\varepsilon^2 \ln(1/\delta))$ for a state of logarithmic Wigner rank $\chi_{\log}(\psi)$. Stabilizer states and Clifford channels, which have zero magic, reduce to the copy-optimal $O(1/\varepsilon^2 \ln(1/\delta))$ regime. This gives the abstract measures of nonstabilizerness an operational meaning as the cost of benchmarking, and it shows that states which are hard to simulate classically are also proportionally harder to certify.

What carries the argument

The central object is the discrete Wigner function and its phase-space point operators $\{A_u\}$, which form an orthogonal operator basis. The fidelity $\mathrm{Tr}[\psi\rho]$ is rewritten as $\sum_u \Pr(u) X_u$ with $\Pr(u) = d^n W_\psi^2(u)$, turning estimation into importance sampling; the variance of $X_u$ is bounded by $\mathrm{Tr}[\rho^2]\le 1$, and the number of nonzero Wigner coefficients of the target fixes how many copies of the state are needed. For channels the same identity runs through the channel Wigner function $W_U(v|u)$ and the distribution $\Pr(v,u) = W_U^2(v|u)/d^{2n}$. The logarithmic Wigner rank $\chi_{\log}(\psi) := \log\chi(\psi) - \log d(\psi)$ is the quantity that appears in the exponential sample-complexity term.

What would settle it

Numerically simulate the state protocol on a qutrit magic state with known logarithmic Wigner rank, sampling $A_u$ according to $\Pr(u)=d^n W_\psi^2(u)$ and using the prescribed $N_k$ measurement rounds; if the empirical number of copies needed to reach accuracy $\varepsilon$ and confidence $1-\delta$ systematically exceeds $O(1/(\varepsilon^2\delta) + 2^{\chi_{\log}}/\varepsilon^2\ln(1/\delta))$, the variance bound would be contradicted. Equivalently, on a real device, measure the qutrit state $|T\rangle\langle T|$ and compare the achieved fidelity error at the predicted copy count.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a resource-theoretic price tag for direct fidelity estimation (DFE). For a pure target state $\psi$ in $H_d^{\otimes n}$, the proposed protocol samples $K = \lceil 8/\varepsilon^2\delta\rceil$ phase-space point operators $A_u$ with probability proportional to $W_\psi^2(u)$, and the expected number of copies of the unknown state $\rho$ is $O(1/(\varepsilon^2\delta) + 2^{\chi_{\log}(\psi)}/\varepsilon^2 \ln(1/\delta))$, where $\chi_{\log}(\psi)$ is the logarithmic Wigner rank, the log of the number of nonzero Wigner coefficients minus the log dimension. The same structure holds for unitary channels with logarithmic Wigner rank $\chi_{\log}(U)$ and for mana-based versions with $2^{M(\psi)}$ or $2^{M(U)}$ in place of the rank. For stabilizer states and Clifford channels the magic terms vanish, leaving a constant-copy protocol independent of system size. Along the way the authors prove that Wigner rank is faithful, additive, and an upper bound on mana, and they extend it to channels with analogous structural properties.

Load-bearing premise

The protocols presuppose that phase-space point operator expectation values are measurable with the required accuracy and that the target's Wigner function is known classically; if either fails, the sample-complexity savings do not carry over to practice.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Stabilizer states and Clifford operations can be fidelity-estimated with a number of copies that does not grow with the number of qudits, $O(1/\varepsilon^2 \ln(1/\delta))$.
  • For a target with logarithmic Wigner rank $\chi_{\log}$, the copy count scales as $2^{\chi_{\log}}$, so each additional unit of magic doubles the expected sample cost.
  • The protocols use only single-qudit phase-space point measurements, and the measurement type is uniform across the procedure.
  • The mana-based protocols give a second, $\ell^1$-norm route to the same benchmarking task, with sample complexity $O(2^{M(\psi)}/\varepsilon^2\delta + 2^{2M(\psi)}/\varepsilon^2 \ln(1/\delta))$.
  • Because positive-Wigner states and CPWP channels are classically simulable, the results imply that DFE remains tractable exactly for the targets that admit efficient classical simulation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct corollary the paper leaves implicit is that the protocol is efficient for any target whose Wigner rank is small, not only for stabilizer states; this suggests a hierarchy of 'low-rank' states that are cheap to certify despite being non-stabilizer.
  • The practical bottleneck is the measurement of $A_u$; if phase-space point operator measurements remain noisy or expensive, the constant-copy advantage will not transfer to hardware, and a testable prediction is that the achievable accuracy will be limited by the measurement fidelity rather than the sampling bound.
  • The channel protocols as printed rely on a normalization in Definition 4; a reader implementing them should verify the $d^n$ factor, since an off-by-$d^n$ shift would change the estimator's expectation value.
  • A natural extension is to continuous-variable systems, where the same importance-sampling identity might connect quadrature measurement costs to Wigner-function negativity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes direct fidelity estimation (DFE) protocols for pure states and unitary channels in odd-prime-dimensional qudit systems, using the discrete Wigner function and two magic measures: the newly studied Wigner rank and the mana. The state protocols (Protocols 1–3) express the fidelity as an expectation value over randomly sampled phase-space point operators, with sampling probabilities set by the target's Wigner function; the channel protocols (Protocols 4–6) do the same for the entanglement fidelity of a unitary channel versus an unknown channel. The main formal claims are Theorem 15 (state fidelity via Wigner rank, sample complexity O(1/(ε²δ) + 2^{χ_log(ψ)}/ε² ln(1/δ))), Theorem 16 (analogous mana bound), Theorem 18 (channel fidelity via Wigner rank, O(1/(ε²δ) + 2^{χ_log(U)}/ε² ln(1/δ))), Theorem 19 (channel mana bound), and Propositions 17 and 20 for stabilizer states and Clifford channels. The paper also establishes properties of Wigner rank: faithfulness, additivity, subadditivity, and an upper bound on mana.

Significance. If the channel measurement primitive is made precise, the paper would provide a clean operational interpretation of two magic measures—Wigner rank and mana—as sample-complexity quantifiers for fidelity estimation, extending the qubit-based stabilizer-Rényi-entropy results of Leone, Oliviero, and Hamma to odd-prime-dimensional qudits and to unitary channels. The state-side derivations are careful and largely check out: the sampling identity of Eq. (41), the variance bound via Lemma 2, and the Chebyshev/Hoeffding two-stage analysis in Section 4.2 are internally consistent, and the sample-count calculation leading to Eq. (71) is explicit. The paper also credits prior work, especially [Bu24] for the state Wigner rank and [WWS19] for channel mana. The main deficiency is that the channel protocols in Sections 6–7 are not self-contained, and the abstract and concluding section state a hardness claim that goes beyond the proven upper bounds.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 6.1, Protocol 4 line 13; Section 7.1, Protocol 5 line 12] The measurement primitive for the channel protocols is not operationally defined. The instruction “Prepare unitary channel U, apply it on the A_{u_k} and measure the outcome on the A_{v_k} basis” cannot be executed as written: a quantum channel acts on states, not on operators, and the unknown channel is Λ, not U. Since Definition 4 defines W_Λ(v|u) = Tr[A_v Λ(A_u)]/d^n, a measurement whose outcomes have mean Tr[A_v Λ(A_u)] would give the Protocol 4 estimator ~X an expectation of d^n W_Λ(v|u)/W_U(v|u), so ~Y would estimate d^n F(U,Λ) rather than F(U,Λ). If the intended implementation is to prepare the normalized Choi state J_Λ/d^n and measure the joint observable A_u^T⊗A_v, then the estimator is unbiased and ∆=1 is correct, but this is never stated. Theorems 18 and 19 rest entirely on this primitive, so the channel protocols require a precise specification of the Choi-state measurement, its normalization, and a correction of the U/Λ typo.
  2. [Abstract and Section 8] The claim that fidelity estimation “requires resources that scale exponentially with nonstabilizerness” is stronger than what is proven. Theorems 15, 16, 18, and 19 are upper bounds on the sample complexity of the authors’ specific protocols; no matching lower bound or converse is established for arbitrary protocols. The first paragraph of Section 8 repeats this overstatement (“requires exponential resources”). The text should be rephrased to say that the proposed protocols have sample complexity scaling with the target’s Wigner rank or mana, unless a genuine lower bound is added.
  3. [Section 6.1 and Appendix E, Eq. (172)] The channel Wigner-rank sample-complexity bound inherits a subtlety that should be stated explicitly: χ(U) counts the number of nonzero entries of the channel Wigner matrix, which can be as large as d^{4n}, so 2^{χ_log(U)} is not a practically small quantity for generic unitary channels. The text correctly notes the worst case in the Protocol 4 summary, but the abstract’s framing of a “fundamental trade-off” conflates the protocol-specific upper bound with a statement about the intrinsic hardness of all fidelity-estimation procedures. Please add an explicit sentence distinguishing protocol-dependent sample complexity from fundamental lower bounds.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Protocol 4, line 13; Protocol 5, line 12; Protocol 6, line 12] The pseudocode says “Prepare unitary channel U” but the unknown channel is Λ; in all three channel protocols this line should refer to the unknown channel or, in the Choi-state formulation, to applying Λ to half of a maximally entangled state.
  2. [Protocol 2, line 7; Protocol 4, line 7; Protocol 5, line 7] There are unmatched closing parentheses in the definitions of K: for example, K = ⌈8∆ψ/ε²δ)⌉ and K = ⌈8/ε²δ)⌉ should be K = ⌈8∆ψ/ε²δ⌉ and K = ⌈8/ε²δ⌉.
  3. [Appendix G] The proof header refers to “Theorem 20” but the statement being proved is Proposition 20; please correct the cross-reference.
  4. [Protocol 3, lines 13–15] The text says that O_{j|k} is rescaled by d^n, but the pseudocode does not show the rescaling step explicitly; clarify whether the recorded eigenvalue is that of A_u or of d^n A_u so that the stated range [−1,1] is unambiguous.
  5. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including “emperical” in Protocol 3, “speep up” in Section 7.2, and “⌈8∆ψ/ε²δ)⌉” style parentheses in theorem statements; these should be fixed in a revision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the protocol costs are derived from the target Wigner function by importance-sampling identities and standard concentration inequalities, with no fitted parameter or self-citation chain doing the work.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Protocol 1 rewrites the fidelity identity Tr[ψρ] = d^n Σ_u Wψ(u)Wρ(u) (Eq. 41) as an expectation over Pr(u) = d^n Wψ^2(u), and the sample-complexity bound in Eqs. (67)–(71) is an exact algebraic consequence of that importance-sampling choice plus Hoeffding and Chebyshev inequalities. The Wigner rank and mana enter only as properties of the known target that set the sampling weights; they are not fitted outputs and are not defined in terms of the sample complexity. The same structure holds for the channel protocols, using the channel fidelity expansion in Eq. (81) and the mana/Wigner-rank bounds in Appendices E and F. Citations to WWS19/WWS20 supply the channel Wigner-function definitions and mana; these are published external formalism rather than a uniqueness theorem or a fitted parameter, and Lemmas 1–2 are proved in the appendices. Two non-circular caveats are worth recording: the abstract's claim that fidelity estimation 'requires resources that scale exponentially' is an overstatement because only upper bounds are proven, and Protocol 4's line 13 is not an operationally specified measurement primitive (it refers to U instead of Λ and does not define the Choi-state implementation), which is a correctness/implementation gap rather than a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard stabilizer and discrete Wigner function background (mostly proved in appendices), on concentration inequalities, and on two domain assumptions: knowledge of the target's Wigner function and the ability to measure phase-space point operators. There are no free parameters fitted to data; complexity is expressed through the target's magic measures. The one ad hoc convention is the channel outcome normalization, which is inconsistent between the pseudocode (Δ = 1) and Definition 4 (factor 1/d^n), a gap that does not change the exponential-in-magic structure but should be fixed.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Discrete Hudson's theorem: a pure state has non-negative Wigner function iff it is a stabilizer state, and stabilizer states have uniformly supported Wigner functions (Theorem 3).
    Used for faithfulness of Wigner rank (Prop. 8), for the converse in Prop. 12, and for the stabilizer-state Protocol 3. Cited from Gro06, not proved in the paper.
  • standard math Phase-space point operators form an orthogonal basis of the operator space with Tr[A_u A_v] = d^n δ_{u,v} and ||A_u||∞ ≤ 1 (Lemma 1).
    Proved in Appendix A; all Wigner expansion identities (Lemma 2, Eqs. 41, 72, 81) and the variance bounds rest on it.
  • standard math Hoeffding and Chebyshev inequalities apply to the bounded measurement outcomes.
    Used in every performance analysis (Sec. 4.2, Appendices C-G) to convert per-setting estimates into fidelity guarantees.
  • domain assumption A unitary that maps every stabilizer state to a stabilizer state is a Clifford operation.
    Used in the converse direction of Prop. 12 to conclude χ_log(U) = 0 implies Clifford. Standard in odd-prime stabilizer theory but not proved in the paper.
  • domain assumption The target state or channel is known classically, including its Wigner coefficients, and phase-space point operators A_u can be measured.
    All six protocols require computing Pr(u) and realizing A_u measurements; Sec. 8 acknowledges such measurements are not yet routine.
  • ad hoc to paper Channel measurement outcomes in Protocols 4-6 follow the normalization of Definition 4 (W_Λ(v|u) = Tr[A_v Λ(A_u)]/d^n).
    The printed protocols set Δ = 1 and record eigenvalues directly, which makes the estimators biased by d^n relative to Definition 4. The convention must be repaired for the pseudocode to match the appendix analysis.
invented entities (1)
  • Wigner rank of quantum channels (χ_log(U))
    purpose: New magic measure for unitary channels; bounds the sample complexity of channel fidelity estimation (Theorem 18) and satisfies faithfulness, additivity, subadditivity (Props. 12-14).
    This is a definitional quantity introduced in Sec. 3.2 (Wigner set of a channel). It has no falsifiable handle outside the paper beyond being computable for individual channels; its significance rests on the paper's own theorems.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Fidelity Estimation in the Resource Theory of Nonstabilizerness." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JDA2Z7RX

@misc{pith2026250612938,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Fidelity Estimation in the Resource Theory of Nonstabilizerness},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JDA2Z7RX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.12938}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum fidelity estimation is essential for benchmarking quantum states and processes on noisy quantum devices. While stabilizer operations form the foundation of fault-tolerant quantum computing, non-stabilizer resources further enable universal quantum computation through state injection. In this work, we propose several efficient fidelity estimation protocols for both quantum states and channels within the resource theory of nonstabilizerness, focusing on qudit systems with odd prime dimensions. Our protocols require measuring only a constant number of phase-space point operator expectation values, with operators selected randomly according to an importance weighting scheme tailored to the target state. Notably, we demonstrate that mathematically defined nonstabilizerness measures--such as Wigner rank and mana--quantify the sample complexity of the proposed protocols, thereby endowing them with a clear operational interpretation in the fidelity estimation task. This connection reveals a fundamental trade-off: while fidelity estimation for general quantum states and channels requires resources that scale exponentially with their nonstabilizerness, the task remains tractable for states and channels that admit efficient classical simulation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTIO...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor

    Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Joseph C Bardin, Rami Barends, Rupak Biswas, Sergio Boixo, Fernando GSL Brandao, David A Buell, et al. Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor. Nature , 574(7779):505--510, 2019

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Distributed quantum inner product estimation

    Anurag Anshu, Zeph Landau, and Yunchao Liu. Distributed quantum inner product estimation. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing , New York, NY, USA, June 2022. ACM

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Simulation of quantum circuits by low-rank stabilizer decompositions

    Sergey Bravyi, Dan Browne, Padraic Calpin, Earl Campbell, David Gosset, and Mark Howard. Simulation of quantum circuits by low-rank stabilizer decompositions. Quantum , 3:181, September 2019, doi:10.22331/q-2019-09-02-181

    doi:10.22331/q-2019-09-02-181 2019

  5. [5]

    Efficient classical simulation of clifford circuits with nonstabilizer input states

    Kaifeng Bu and Dax Enshan Koh. Efficient classical simulation of clifford circuits with nonstabilizer input states. Physical Review Letters , 123:170502, Oct 2019, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.170502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.170502 2019

  6. [6]

    Sergey Bravyi, Graeme Smith, and John A. Smolin. Trading classical and quantum computational resources. Physical Review X , 6(2), June 2016. ://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.6.021043

    doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.021043 2016

  7. [7]

    Extremality of stabilizer states

    Kaifeng Bu. Extremality of stabilizer states, 2024. arXiv:2403.13632 https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.13632

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Introduction to quantum noise, measurement, and amplification

    Aashish A Clerk, Michel H Devoret, Steven M Girvin, Florian Marquardt, and Robert J Schoelkopf. Introduction to quantum noise, measurement, and amplification. Reviews of Modern Physics , 82(2):1155--1208, 2010

    work page 2010

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Quantum resource theories

    Eric Chitambar and Gilad Gour. Quantum resource theories. Reviews of Modern Physics , 91(2):025001, 2019

    2019

  2. [10]

    A programmable qudit-based quantum processor

    Yulin Chi, Jieshan Huang, Zhanchuan Zhang, Jun Mao, Zinan Zhou, Xiaojiong Chen, Chonghao Zhai, Jueming Bao, Tianxiang Dai, Huihong Yuan, et al. A programmable qudit-based quantum processor. Nature Communications , 13(1):1166, 2022. ://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28767-x

    2022

  3. [11]

    Efficient quantum state tomography

    Marcus Cramer, Martin B Plenio, Steven T Flammia, Rolando Somma, David Gross, Stephen D Bartlett, Olivier Landon-Cardinal, David Poulin, and Yi-Kai Liu. Efficient quantum state tomography. Nature Communications , 1(1):149, 2010

    2010

  4. [12]

    Roads towards fault-tolerant universal quantum computation

    Earl T Campbell, Barbara M Terhal, and Christophe Vuillot. Roads towards fault-tolerant universal quantum computation. Nature , 549(7671):172--179, 2017

    2017

  5. [13]

    Campbell, Barbara M

    Earl T. Campbell, Barbara M. Terhal, and Christophe Vuillot. Roads towards fault-tolerant universal quantum computation. Nature , 549(7671):172--179, sep 2017, doi:10.1038/nature23460

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    Materials challenges and opportunities for quantum computing hardware

    Nathalie P De Leon, Kohei M Itoh, Dohun Kim, Karan K Mehta, Tracy E Northup, Hanhee Paik, BS Palmer, Nitin Samarth, Sorawis Sangtawesin, and David W Steuerman. Materials challenges and opportunities for quantum computing hardware. Science , 372(6539):eabb2823, 2021. ://www.sci...

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    Unconditional advantage of noisy qudit quantum circuits over biased threshold circuits in constant depth

    Michael de Oliveira, Sathyawageeswar Subramanian, Leandro Mendes, and Min-Hsiu Hsieh. Unconditional advantage of noisy qudit quantum circuits over biased threshold circuits in constant depth. Nature Communications , 16(1):3559, 2025

    2025

  8. [16]

    Discrete Wigner functions from informationally complete quantum measurements

    John B DeBrota and Blake C Stacey. Discrete Wigner functions from informationally complete quantum measurements. Physical Review A , 102(3):032221, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    da Silva, Olivier Landon-Cardinal , and David Poulin

    Marcus P. da Silva, Olivier Landon-Cardinal , and David Poulin. Practical Characterization of Quantum Devices without Tomography . Physical Review Letters , 107(21):210404, 2011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.210404

    2011 doi

  10. [18]

    Joshi, Rainer Blatt, Christian F

    Andreas Elben, Beno\^ t Vermersch, Rick van Bijnen, Christian Kokail, Tiff Brydges, Christine Maier, Manoj K. Joshi, Rainer Blatt, Christian F. Roos, and Peter Zoller. Cross-platform verification of intermediate scale quantum devices. Physical Review Letters , 124:010504, Jan ...

    2020 doi

  11. [19]

    Quasi-probability representations of quantum theory with applications to quantum information science

    Christopher Ferrie. Quasi-probability representations of quantum theory with applications to quantum information science. Reports on Progress in Physics , 74(11):116001, October 2011, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/74/11/116001

    2011 doi

  12. [20]

    Flammia and Yi-Kai Liu

    Steven T. Flammia and Yi-Kai Liu. Direct Fidelity Estimation from Few Pauli Measurements . Physical Review Letters , 106(23):230501, 2011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.230501

    2011 doi

  13. [21]

    Flammia, Stephen Becker, and Jens Eisert

    David Gross, Yi-Kai Liu, Steven T. Flammia, Stephen Becker, and Jens Eisert. Quantum state tomography via compressed sensing. Physical Review Letters , 105(15), October 2010, doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.150401

    2010 doi

  14. [22]

    Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction

    Daniel Gottesman. Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction . California Institute of Technology, 1997

    1997

  15. [23]

    Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation

    Daniel Gottesman. Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation. Physical Review A , 57(1):127, 1998

    1998

  16. [24]

    An introduction to quantum error correction and fault-tolerant quantum computation, 2009

    Daniel Gottesman. An introduction to quantum error correction and fault-tolerant quantum computation, 2009. arXiv:0904.2557 https://arxiv.org/abs/0904.2557

    2009 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Hudson's theorem for finite-dimensional quantum systems

    David Gross. Hudson's theorem for finite-dimensional quantum systems. Journal of Mathematical Physics , 47(12), dec 2006, doi:10.1063/1.2393152

    2006 doi

  18. [26]

    Non-negative Wigner functions in prime dimensions

    David Gross. Non-negative Wigner functions in prime dimensions. Applied Physics B , 86(3):367--370, dec 2007, doi:10.1007/s00340-006-2510-9

    2007 doi

  19. [27]

    Stabilizer entropies and nonstabilizerness monotones

    Tobias Haug and Lorenzo Piroli. Stabilizer entropies and nonstabilizerness monotones. Quantum , 7:1092, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Selective Wigner phase space tomography and its application for studying quantum chaos

    Deepesh Khushwani, Priya Batra, VR Krithika, and TS Mahesh. Selective Wigner phase space tomography and its application for studying quantum chaos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.08307 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Qudit-based variational quantum eigensolver using photonic orbital angular momentum states

    Byungjoo Kim, Kang-Min Hu, Myung-Hyun Sohn, Yosep Kim, Yong-Su Kim, Seung-Woo Lee, and Hyang-Tag Lim. Qudit-based variational quantum eigensolver using photonic orbital angular momentum states. Science Advances , 10(43):eado3472, 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Quantum tomography protocols with positivity are compressed sensing protocols

    Amir Kalev, Robert L Kosut, and Ivan H Deutsch. Quantum tomography protocols with positivity are compressed sensing protocols. npj Quantum Information , 1(1):1--6, 2015

    2015

  23. [31]

    Colloquium: Qudits for decomposing multiqubit gates and realizing quantum algorithms

    Evgeniy O Kiktenko, Anastasiia S Nikolaeva, and Aleksey K Fedorov. Colloquium: Qudits for decomposing multiqubit gates and realizing quantum algorithms. Reviews of Modern Physics , 97(2):021003, 2025

    2025

  24. [32]

    Efficient qudit based scheme for photonic quantum computing

    M \'a rton Kar \'a csony, L \'a szl \'o Oroszl \'a ny, and Zoltan Zimboras. Efficient qudit based scheme for photonic quantum computing. SciPost Physics Core , 7(2):032, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Quantum-state tomography and discrete Wigner function

    Ulf Leonhardt. Quantum-state tomography and discrete Wigner function. Physical Review Letters , 74(21):4101, 1995

    1995

  26. [34]

    Stabilizer r \' e nyi entropy

    Lorenzo Leone, Salvatore F E Oliviero, and Alioscia Hamma. Stabilizer r \' e nyi entropy . Physical Review Letters , 128(5):50402, 2022, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.050402

    2022 doi

  27. [35]

    Lorenzo Leone, Salvatore F. E. Oliviero, and Alioscia Hamma. Nonstabilizerness determining the hardness of direct fidelity estimation. Physical Review A , 107(2), February 2023, doi:10.1103/physreva.107.022429

    2023 doi

  28. [36]

    A. I. Lvovsky and M. G. Raymer. Continuous-variable optical quantum-state tomography. Reviews of Modern Physics , 81(1):299–332, March 2009, doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.299

    2009 doi

  29. [37]

    Quantum coherence and distinguishability: A resource-theoretic perspective on wave-particle duality

    Zhiping Liu, Chengkai Zhu, Hua-Lei Yin, and Xin Wang. Quantum coherence and distinguishability: A resource-theoretic perspective on wave-particle duality. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14323 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Mari and J

    A. Mari and J. Eisert. Positive wigner functions render classical simulation of quantum computation efficient . Physical Review Letters , 109(23):1--7, 2012, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.230503. arXiv:1208.3660 https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3660

    2012 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Simulating two-dimensional lattice gauge theories on a qudit quantum computer

    Michael Meth, Jinglei Zhang, Jan F Haase, Claire Edmunds, Lukas Postler, Andrew J Jena, Alex Steiner, Luca Dellantonio, Rainer Blatt, Peter Zoller, et al. Simulating two-dimensional lattice gauge theories on a qudit quantum computer. Nature Physics , pages 1--7, 2025

    2025

  32. [40]

    Empowering a qudit-based quantum processor by traversing the dual bosonic ladder

    Long B Nguyen, Noah Goss, Karthik Siva, Yosep Kim, Ed Younis, Bingcheng Qing, Akel Hashim, David I Santiago, and Irfan Siddiqi. Empowering a qudit-based quantum processor by traversing the dual bosonic ladder. Nature Communications , 15(1):7117, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    Experimental direct quantum fidelity learning via a data-driven approach

    Haiyang Qin, Liangyu Che, Chao Wei, Feng Xu, Yulei Huang, and Tao Xin. Experimental direct quantum fidelity learning via a data-driven approach. Physical Review Letters , 132(19):190801, 2024. ://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.190801

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    Renes, Robin Blume-Kohout, A

    Joseph M. Renes, Robin Blume-Kohout, A. J. Scott, and Carlton M. Caves. Symmetric informationally complete quantum measurements. Journal of Mathematical Physics , 45(6):2171–2180, June 2004, doi:10.1063/1.1737053

    2004 doi

  35. [43]

    Experimental quantum compressed sensing for a seven-qubit system

    Carlos A Riofrio, David Gross, Steven T Flammia, Thomas Monz, Daniel Nigg, Rainer Blatt, and Jens Eisert. Experimental quantum compressed sensing for a seven-qubit system. Nature Communications , 8(1):15305, 2017

    2017

  36. [44]

    A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions

    Martin Ringbauer, Michael Meth, Lukas Postler, Roman Stricker, Rainer Blatt, Philipp Schindler, and Thomas Monz. A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions. Nature Physics , 18(9):1053–1057, July 2022, doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01658-0

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    Simple procedure for phase-space measurement and entanglement validation

    Russell P Rundle, PW Mills, Todd Tilma, JH Samson, and Mark J Everitt. Simple procedure for phase-space measurement and entanglement validation. Physical Review A , 96(2):022117, 2017

    2017

  38. [46]

    High-dimensional one-way quantum processing implemented on d-level cluster states

    Christian Reimer, Stefania Sciara, Piotr Roztocki, Mehedi Islam, Luis Romero Cort \'e s, Yanbing Zhang, Bennet Fischer, S \'e bastien Loranger, Raman Kashyap, Alfonso Cino, et al. High-dimensional one-way quantum processing implemented on d-level cluster states. Nature Physics...

    2019

  39. [47]

    Fault-tolerant quantum computation

    Peter W Shor. Fault-tolerant quantum computation. In Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science , pages 56--65. IEEE, 1996

    1996

  40. [48]

    Sudden death of quantum advantage in correlation generations

    Weixiao Sun, Fuchuan Wei, Yuguo Shao, and Zhaohui Wei. Sudden death of quantum advantage in correlation generations. Science Advances , 10(47):eadr5002, 2024

    2024

  41. [49]

    General resource theories in quantum mechanics and beyond: Operational characterization via discrimination tasks

    Ryuji Takagi and Bartosz Regula. General resource theories in quantum mechanics and beyond: Operational characterization via discrimination tasks. Physical Review X , 9(3):031053, 2019

    2019

  42. [50]

    Application of the resource theory of channels to communication scenarios

    Ryuji Takagi, Kun Wang, and Masahito Hayashi. Application of the resource theory of channels to communication scenarios. Physical Review Letters , 124(12):120502, 2020

    2020

  43. [51]

    Negative quasi-probability as a resource for quantum computation

    Victor Veitch, Christopher Ferrie, David Gross, and Joseph Emerson. Negative quasi-probability as a resource for quantum computation. New Journal of Physics , 14(11):113011, November 2012, doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/11/113011

    2012 doi

  44. [53]

    Victor Veitch, S. A. Hamed Mousavian, Daniel Gottesman, and Joseph Emerson. The resource theory of stabilizer quantum computation. New Journal of Physics , 16(1):013009, 2014, doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/1/013009

    2014 doi

  45. [54]

    Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor

    Yulin Wu, Wan-Su Bao, Sirui Cao, Fusheng Chen, Ming-Cheng Chen, Xiawei Chen, Tung-Hsun Chung, Hui Deng, Yajie Du, Daojin Fan, et al. Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor. Physical Review Letters , 127(18):180501, 2021. ://journals.ap...

    2021 doi

  46. [55]

    Mitigating quantum errors via truncated neumann series

    Kun Wang, Yu-Ao Chen, and Xin Wang. Mitigating quantum errors via truncated neumann series. Science China Information Sciences , 66(8):180508, 2023

    2023

  47. [56]

    Optimal verification of two-qubit pure states

    Kun Wang and Masahito Hayashi. Optimal verification of two-qubit pure states. Physical Review A , 100(3):032315, 2019

    2019

  48. [57]

    Sanders, and Sabre Kais

    Yuchen Wang, Zixuan Hu, Barry C. Sanders, and Sabre Kais. Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing. Frontiers in Physics , 8, nov 2020, doi:10.3389/fphy.2020.589504

    2020

  49. [58]

    A Wigner -function formulation of finite-state quantum mechanics

    William K Wootters. A Wigner -function formulation of finite-state quantum mechanics. Annals of Physics , 176(1):1--21, 1987, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(87)90176-X

    1987 doi

  50. [59]

    Phase-space measurement and coherence synthesis of optical beams

    Laura Waller, Guohai Situ, and Jason W Fleischer. Phase-space measurement and coherence synthesis of optical beams. Nature Photonics , 6(7):474--479, 2012

    2012

  51. [60]

    Quantifying the magic of quantum channels

    Xin Wang, Mark M Wilde, and Yuan Su. Quantifying the magic of quantum channels . New Journal of Physics , 21(10):103002, oct 2019. arXiv:1903.04483 https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.04483 . ://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/ab451d

    2019 arXiv

  52. [61]

    Wilde, and Yuan Su

    Xin Wang, Mark M. Wilde, and Yuan Su. Efficiently computable bounds for magic state distillation. Physical Review Letters , 124(9):090505, 2020, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.090505

    2020 doi

  53. [62]

    Optimal verification of general bipartite pure states

    Xiao-Dong Yu, Jiangwei Shang, and Otfried G \"u hne. Optimal verification of general bipartite pure states. npj Quantum Information , 5(1):112, 2019

    2019

  54. [63]

    Green, Cinthia Huerta Alderete, Nhung H

    Daiwei Zhu, Ze-Pei Cian, Crystal Noel, Andrew Risinger, Debopriyo Biswas, Laird Egan, Yingyue Zhu, Alaina M. Green, Cinthia Huerta Alderete, Nhung H. Nguyen, Qingfeng Wang, Andrii Maksymov, Yunseong Nam, Marko Cetina, Norbert M. Linke, Mohammad Hafezi, and Christopher Monroe. ...

    2022 arXiv

  55. [64]

    Amortized stabilizer R\'enyi entropy of quantum dynamics

    Chengkai Zhu, Yu-Ao Chen, Zanqiu Shen, Zhiping Liu, Zhan Yu, and Xin Wang. Amortized stabilizer R\'enyi entropy of quantum dynamics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.06659 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  56. [65]

    Efficient verification of hypergraph states

    Huangjun Zhu and Masahito Hayashi. Efficient verification of hypergraph states. Physical Review Applied , 12(5):054047, 2019

    2019

  57. [66]

    Direct fidelity estimation of quantum states using machine learning

    Xiaoqian Zhang, Maolin Luo, Zhaodi Wen, Qin Feng, Shengshi Pang, Weiqi Luo, and Xiaoqi Zhou. Direct fidelity estimation of quantum states using machine learning. Physical Review Letters , 127(13), September 2021. ://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.130503

    2021 doi

  58. [67]

    Limitations of classically simulable measurements for quantum state discrimination

    Chengkai Zhu, Zhiping Liu, Chenghong Zhu, and Xin Wang. Limitations of classically simulable measurements for quantum state discrimination. Physical Review Letters , 133(1):010202, 2024

    2024

  59. [68]

    Quantum computational advantage using photons

    Han-Sen Zhong, Hui Wang, Yu-Hao Deng, Ming-Cheng Chen, Li-Chao Peng, Yi-Han Luo, Jian Qin, Dian Wu, Xing Ding, Yi Hu, et al. Quantum computational advantage using photons. Science , 370(6523):1460--1463, 2020. ://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.abe8770

    2020 doi

  60. [69]

    Cross- Platform Comparison of Arbitrary Quantum Processes

    Congcong Zheng, Xutao Yu, and Kun Wang. Cross- Platform Comparison of Arbitrary Quantum Processes . npj Quantum Information , 2024, doi:10.1038/s41534-023-00797-3. arXiv:2303.13911 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.13911

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.