Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Interplay of resources for universal continuous-variable quantum computing

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that universal continuous-variable quantum computing requires three resources—non-Gaussianity, entanglement, and a newly identified 'symplectic coherence'—and gives a classical algorithm that simulates circuits missing…

desk verdict Symplectic coherence is a real and useful CV resource idea, and the quadrature path-sum is genuinely new; the main theorem is stated too broadly for arbitrary input states, but the core no-coherence simulation result is sound. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07670 v1 pith:NL6YAXF6 submitted 2025-02-11 quant-ph

Varun Upreti , Ulysse Chabaud This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P6881P45
keywords symplecticcoherencecontinuous-variablequantumcomputingclassicalsimulationresourcetheoryquadratureback-propagationGKPencodingcubicphasegateGaussianunitaries
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 argues that universal continuous-variable (CV) quantum computing rests on the interplay of three resources: non-Gaussianity, entanglement, and a property it introduces called symplectic coherence, which is the tendency of a Gaussian unitary to mix position and momentum quadratures. Its central result is a classical algorithm that computes expectation values of fixed-degree polynomial observables in time polynomial in the number of modes and gates for circuits in which the passive linear gates do not mix quadratures. The same algorithm extends to circuits with a constant number of quadrature-mixing rotations, at a cost that doubles with each rotation layer. By connecting each resource to a specific gate of a universal CV gate set and to the Gottesman–Kitaev–Preskill encoding, the paper maps the CV resource trio onto the discrete-variable trio of magic, entanglement, and coherence. If the claims hold, symplectic coherence is a necessary computational resource, not merely a mathematical property.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is quadrature back-propagation over multiple computational paths. Instead of evolving a single quadrature operator through the whole alternating circuit, Theorem 4 expresses that evolution as a weighted sum over $t$ simpler circuits, each containing only one cubic phase gate, with weights $\gamma_i/\gamma$ distributing the total cubicity $\gamma=\sum_i \gamma_i$. Because cubic phase gates send $\hat p_1 \to \hat p_1 + 3\gamma \hat q_1^2$ while leaving $\hat q$ alone, and because displaced orthogonal gates never mix $\hat q$ with $\hat p$, every back-propagated quadrature stays a degree-two polynomial, so a degree-$d$ observable expands into $O(m^d)$ manageable terms; a rotation gate breaks this confinement and doubles the polynomial degree per layer.

What would settle it

Construct a two-mode circuit of the Theorem 1 form with a non-Gaussian input state that has an efficient classical description but whose moments are hard to compute, and check whether the $O(m^{3d}+t^2m^6)$ bound on evaluating the back-propagated polynomial holds; if the expectation cannot be computed that fast, the theorem's complexity claim fails. To test the necessity of symplectic coherence, exhibit a family of circuits with rotation gates whose simulation cost does not double with each additional rotation layer, which would contradict the claimed resource role.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is that a universal continuous-variable computation can be efficiently classically simulated whenever any one of the three resources is missing. The concrete statement is Theorem 1: for a circuit $\hat{O}_\gamma = \hat O_t e^{i\gamma_t \hat q_1^3}\hat O_{t-1}\cdots \hat O_1 e^{i\gamma_1 \hat q_1^3}\hat O_0$ built from displaced orthogonal gates interleaved with cubic phase gates, the expectation value of any polynomial Hamiltonian $H(\hat q,\hat p)$ of degree $d$ can be computed in time $O(m^{3d}+t^2 m^6)$. Theorem 2 extends the simulation to circuits with a constant number $c$ of single-mode rotation gates, with cost $O(m d 2^{c+1} + (c+1)t^2 m^7)$. From this the paper concludes that symplectic coherence, generated by rotation gates such as the Fourier gate, is a necessary resource for universality in the standard CV model, alongside non-Gaussianity and entanglement.

Load-bearing premise

The proofs show that the back-propagated observable is a succinct polynomial, but they assume without proof that an efficiently describable input state $\rho$ allows the expectation value of that polynomial to be evaluated in the stated time; for generic continuous-variable states this evaluation may be as hard as the original problem, so the complexity bounds are certain only for states whose moments are known, such as Gaussian states.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For fixed polynomial degree $d$ and polynomially many modes, Theorem 1 gives a polynomial-time classical algorithm for expectation values of CV circuits without quadrature-mixing gates.
  • Any universal CV computation in the standard gate set must therefore include rotation gates or equivalent symplectic coherence: without them the cubic nonlinearity never amplifies across layers.
  • Circuits with a constant number of rotation gates remain efficiently simulable, so symplectic coherence acts as a resource with a sharp threshold in the number of quadrature-mixing layers.
  • Via the GKP encoding, the CV resource trio reproduces the discrete-variable interplay of magic, entanglement, and coherence, giving a unified picture of what makes quantum computations difficult to simulate classically.
  • The path-summation formalism extends Pauli-back-propagation ideas from qubit circuits to continuous-variable circuits, opening CV circuits to polynomial-time simulation methods previously restricted to discrete variables.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves open whether a logarithmic number of rotation layers is still classically simulable; its own cost bound suggests that a different compression mechanism would be needed, so testing algorithms that group rotation layers would clarify the true threshold.
  • Formalizing symplectic coherence for states, for instance through off-diagonal blocks of covariance matrices, could turn the resource into a computable quantifier for CV metrology or error correction, which the paper does not do.
  • If the necessity claim is right, photonic hardware that avoids quadrature-mixing gates can be classically spoofed even when it applies cubic phase gates; this is a concrete prediction that could be tested on existing programmable photonic platforms.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a resource called symplectic coherence for continuous-variable quantum circuits, defined as the mixing of position and momentum quadratures by Gaussian unitary gates, and argues that it is the CV counterpart of DV coherence. The central technical results are a classical simulation algorithm for expectation values of polynomial quadrature observables in circuits built from displaced orthogonal gates and cubic phase gates (Theorem 1), an extension to circuits with a constant number of single-mode rotation gates (Theorem 2), and a GKP-based mapping of the DV trio {magic, entanglement, coherence} to the CV trio {non-Gaussianity, entanglement, symplectic coherence}. The abstract claims that the absence of any one of the three CV resources enables efficient classical simulation, and that their combined presence enables universal CV quantum computing.

Significance. If the stated results hold with the qualifications below, the paper makes a meaningful contribution: it gives a concrete, parameter-free classical simulation algorithm for a nontrivial family of CV circuits, introduces a new resource distinction that is genuinely different from non-Gaussianity and entanglement, and connects it to the established DV resource picture through the GKP encoding. The path-sum quadrature back-propagation technique in Theorem 4 is original and likely to be useful beyond this paper. The paper is also commendable for providing explicit proofs of the main lemmas rather than only sketches.

major comments (2)
  1. [Appendix A, proof of Theorem 3, final paragraph] The proof constructs the back-propagated polynomial P(q,p)=O_γ^† H O_γ, but then asserts that 'given the efficient description of the input state ρ, this also gives the time complexity of computing its expectation value.' This evaluation step is not proved. For a generic m-mode CV state, 'efficient description' is never defined, and evaluating Tr[ρ P] for a degree-2d polynomial P is as hard as the original expectation-value problem unless the state provides access to its moments. The stated bound O(m^{3d}+t^2m^6) therefore holds as stated only for input states with classically available moments, such as Gaussian states or states with bounded occupation number. The same gap propagates to Theorem 2/Theorem 5. The theorems should either restrict the input-state class explicitly or include the cost of evaluating the polynomial expectation in the complexity bound.
  2. [Abstract and Section IV] The abstract's claim that 'the absence of any one of the three resources—non-Gaussianity, entanglement, or symplectic coherence—leads to efficient classical simulation' is not supported for the entanglement leg. The paper supplies a simulation theorem for the absence of symplectic coherence (Theorem 1) and invokes known Gaussian simulation for the absence of non-Gaussianity, but it provides no theorem or algorithm for circuits that lack entanglement, i.e., circuits built only from rotations and cubic phase gates. Theorem 2 is exponential in the number c of rotation gates and does not cover this regime. The authors should either prove the missing entanglement-absence claim or qualify the abstract and introduction accordingly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section III] Symplectic coherence is defined for Gaussian unitary gates, but the term is then applied to circuits containing non-Gaussian gates. The authors should clarify that the resource is attributed to the Gaussian part of the circuit, since the non-Gaussian gates themselves are not assigned a symplectic matrix.
  2. [Section IV, Theorem 2] The exponent notation in the complexity bound is easy to misread: the theorem should clearly typeset O(m^{d2^{c+1}} + (c+1)t^2m^7) so that d2^{c+1} is visibly in the exponent. The proof in Appendix B derives an exponential-in-d bound, and the statement should match it unambiguously.
  3. [Section VI] The conclusion states that circuits with a constant number of rotation gates are efficiently simulable; this is only claimed when the observable degree d and the number of modes m are such that d2^{c+1}=O(1) or when d=O(1), so the qualification 'for constant-degree observables' should be repeated here.
  4. [Section IV, reference [64]] The claim that quadrature evolution in circuits with Fourier gates and cubic phase gates leads to doubly exponentially large numbers is cited to [64] without a specific theorem or equation number; a precise pointer would help the reader verify the hardness intuition.
  5. [Appendix A] There is a typo in the phrase 'appopriate commutation relation'; the word should be 'appropriate'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: symplectic coherence is defined by a concrete matrix property and the simulation theorems rest on independent back-propagation algebra; the flagged issues are correctness gaps, not self-reference.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. Symplectic coherence is defined by a concrete property of the symplectic matrix (off-block-diagonal entries in the quadrature basis), not as "whatever makes simulation hard"; Theorem 1 then proves, rather than assumes, that its absence permits efficient expectation-value computation via the quadrature back-propagation identity in Theorem 4. The GKP-based DV/CV correspondence is an interpretive mapping of gates (T to cubic, CNOT to SUM, H to Fourier) and does not feed back into the proofs of Theorems 1 and 2. Self-citations [16,58,64] are present but not load-bearing: the polynomial back-propagation argument is self-contained and does not rely on an unverified prior uniqueness result or an ansatz. Two non-circular gaps should be flagged. First, Appendix A closes with "given the efficient description of the input state ρ, this also gives the time complexity of computing its expectation value"; for an arbitrary CV state an "efficient description" is not defined, and evaluating Tr[ρP] for the degree-2d polynomial P is as hard as the original problem, so the stated O(m^{3d}+t^2m^6) bound is only established for states with classically available moments (e.g., vacuum or Gaussian states). Second, the abstract's "absence of entanglement" leg is not proved by any theorem: Theorem 1 removes symplectic coherence, not entanglement, and Theorem 2 adds rotations back. These are overreaches in the statements, not circular reductions of the main result. The DV analogy is partly constructed—symplectic coherence is defined so that the Fourier gate, the GKP image of Hadamard, induces it—but this construction is an interpretive overlay and does not support the simulation theorems.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the universal CV gate set, the cubic gate action, the GKP dictionary, and two unstated computational assumptions about evaluating expectation values and exact arithmetic. There are no numerical free parameters fitted to data; the parameters gamma_i and theta_i are circuit inputs rather than fitted constants.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The set {cubic phase gate, orthogonal gates, rotation gates, displacement gates} is universal for continuous-variable quantum computing.
    Invoked in Section II, Equations (4) and (5), relying on Lloyd-Braunstein universality and the Bloch-Messiah decomposition. The resource analysis is tied to this specific gate set.
  • standard math The Heisenberg action of the cubic phase gate on quadratures is p -> p + 3 gamma q^2, with q unchanged.
    Used throughout Theorem 4 and the appendices as the engine of non-Gaussianity. This is a standard result, cited to [56].
  • domain assumption The GKP encoding maps the DV gates T, CNOT, and H to the cubic phase gate, the SUM gate, and the Fourier gate respectively.
    Used in Section V to connect DV and CV resource interplays. This is a known property of the GKP encoding, but the paper treats it as exact even though physical GKP states are approximate.
  • domain assumption An efficient description of the input state rho allows efficient evaluation of expectation values of the back-propagated polynomial observable.
    The final paragraph of the proof of Theorem 3 in Appendix A asserts this without proof. It is valid for vacuum and Gaussian states with known moments, but not for arbitrary CV states.
  • domain assumption Real gate parameters and polynomial coefficients can be manipulated with unit-cost exact arithmetic.
    The complexity bounds count algebraic operations but do not track the bit size of coefficients, which could grow with the circuit depth t or the number of rotation layers. This is a common idealization but it is not stated.
invented entities (1)
  • Symplectic coherence
    purpose: A resource property of Gaussian unitary gates that mix position and momentum quadratures, proposed as the CV analogue of DV coherence.
    Defined in Section III. Its operational role is established by the paper's own simulation theorems, not by an independent falsifiable prediction outside the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Interplay of resources for universal continuous-variable quantum computing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NL6YAXF6

@misc{pith2026250207670,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Interplay of resources for universal continuous-variable quantum computing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NL6YAXF6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07670}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum resource theories identify the features of quantum computers that provide their computational advantage over classical systems. We investigate the resources driving the complexity of classical simulation in the standard model of continuous-variable quantum computing, and their interplay enabling computational universality. Specifically, we uncover a new property in continuous-variable circuits, analogous to coherence in discrete-variable systems, termed symplectic coherence. Using quadrature propagation across multiple computational paths, we develop an efficient classical simulation algorithm for continuous-variable computations with low symplectic coherence. This establishes symplectic coherence as a necessary resource for universality in continuous-variable quantum computing, alongside non-Gaussianity and entanglement. Via the Gottesman--Kitaev--Preskill encoding, we show that the interplay of these three continuous-variable quantum resources mirrors the discrete-variable relationship between coherence, magic, and entanglement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07670 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Interplay of resources that determine the complex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The interplay of CV non-Gaussianity, entanglement, and symplectic coherence generalizes the resource interplay of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Universal circuit for CV quantum computations. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Quadrature back-propagation in the absence of sym [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Towards gravimetry enhancement with squeezed states

    quant-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Tilted (position-momentum correlated) squeezed vacuum probes give a quantum Fisher information advantage over vacuum probes for estimating gravitational acceleration at all interaction times, unlike canonical quadratu...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    P. W. Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: dis- crete logarithms and factoring, in Proceedings 35th an- nual symposium on foundations of computer science (Ieee, 1994) pp. 124–134

    1994

  2. [2]

    Aaronson and A

    S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, The computational com- plexity of linear optics, Theory of Computing 9, 143 (2013), arXiv:1011.3245

    arXiv 2013

  3. [3]

    T. F. Rønnow, Z. Wang, J. Job, S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, D. Wecker, J. M. Martinis, D. A. Lidar, and M. Troyer, Defining and detecting quantum speedup, Science 345, 420 (2014)

    2014

  4. [4]

    Harrow and A

    A. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Quantum computational supremacy, Nature 549, 203 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Boixo, S

    S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, N. Ding, Z. Jiang, M. J. Bremner, J. M. Martinis, and H. Neven, Characterizing quantum supremacy in near- term devices, Nature Physics 14, 595 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Shi, L.-M

    Y.-Y. Shi, L.-M. Duan, and G. Vidal, Classical simula- tion of quantum many-body systems with a tree tensor network, Phys. Rev. A 74, 022320 (2006)

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    Huang, Classical simulation of quantum many-body systems, Ph.D

    Y. Huang, Classical simulation of quantum many-body systems, Ph.D. thesis, UC Berkeley (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Yung, Quantum supremacy: some fundamental concepts, National Science Review 6, 22 (2019)

    M.-H. Yung, Quantum supremacy: some fundamental concepts, National Science Review 6, 22 (2019)

    work page 2019

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Y. Zhou, E. M. Stoudenmire, and X. Waintal, What lim- its the simulation of quantum computers?, Phys. Rev. X 10, 041038 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    X. Xu, S. Benjamin, J. Sun, X. Yuan, and P. Zhang, A herculean task: Classical simulation of quantum comput- ers (2023), arXiv:2302.08880 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Howard and E

    M. Howard and E. Campbell, Application of a resource theory for magic states to fault-tolerant quantum com- puting, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 090501 (2017)

    2017

  4. [12]

    Chitambar and G

    E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Quantum resource theories, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025001 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    Albarelli, M

    F. Albarelli, M. G. Genoni, M. G. Paris, and A. Fer- raro, Resource theory of quantum non-Gaussianity and Wigner negativity, Physical Review A98, 052350 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Takagi and B

    R. Takagi and B. Regula, General resource theories in quantum mechanics and beyond: Operational character- ization via discrimination tasks, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031053 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    Amaral, Resource theory of contextuality (2019), arXiv:1904.04182 [quant-ph]

    B. Amaral, Resource theory of contextuality (2019), arXiv:1904.04182 [quant-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Thomas, P.-E

    H. Thomas, P.-E. Emeriau, E. Kashefi, H. Ollivier, and U. Chabaud, On the role of coherence for quantum com- putational advantage (2024), arXiv:2410.07024 [quant- ph]. 8

    2024

  9. [17]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    Baumgratz, M

    T. Baumgratz, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Quantify- ing coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 140401 (2014)

    2014

  11. [19]

    Streltsov, G

    A. Streltsov, G. Adesso, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Quantum coherence as a resource, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 041003 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Stabilizer r´ enyi entropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 050402 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9807006 [quant- ph]

    D. Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9807006 [quant- ph]

    1998 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Aaronson and D

    S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits, Phys. Rev. A 70, 052328 (2004)

    2004

  15. [23]

    Vidal, Efficient classical simulation of slightly entan- gled quantum computations, Phys

    G. Vidal, Efficient classical simulation of slightly entan- gled quantum computations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 147902 (2003)

    2003

  16. [24]

    S. L. Braunstein and P. van Loock, Quantum informa- tion with continuous variables, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513 (2005)

    2005

  17. [25]

    Ferraro, S

    A. Ferraro, S. Olivares, and M. G. A. Paris, Gaus- sian states in continuous variable quantum information (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0503237 [quant-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Weedbrook, S

    C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. Garc ´ ıa-Patr´ on, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, Gaussian quantum information, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621 (2012)

    2012

  19. [27]

    Furusawa et al

    A. Furusawa et al. , Unconditional quantum teleporta- tion, Science 282, 706 (1998)

    1998

  20. [28]

    Yokoyama, R

    S. Yokoyama, R. Ukai, S. C. Armstrong, C. Sorn- phiphatphong, T. Kaji, S. Suzuki, J. ichi Yoshikawa, H. Yonezawa, N. C. Menicucci, and A. Furusawa, Ultra- large-scale continuous-variable cluster states multiplexed in the time domain, Nature Photonics 7, 982 (2013)

    2013

  21. [29]

    Gottesman, A

    D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, Encoding a qubit in an oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001)

    2001

  22. [30]

    Sivak, A

    V. Sivak, A. Eickbusch, B. Royer, et al., Real-time quan- tum error correction beyond break-even, Nature 616, 50 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Garc ´ ıa-´Alvarez, C

    L. Garc ´ ıa-´Alvarez, C. Calcluth, A. Ferraro, and G. Fer- rini, Efficient simulatability of continuous-variable cir- cuits with large wigner negativity, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043322 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    Calcluth, A

    C. Calcluth, A. Ferraro, and G. Ferrini, Vacuum pro- vides quantum advantage to otherwise simulatable archi- tectures, Phys. Rev. A 107, 062414 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    S. D. Bartlett, B. C. Sanders, S. L. Braunstein, and K. Nemoto, Efficient classical simulation of continuous variable quantum information processes, Physical Review Letters 88, 097904 (2002)

    2002

  26. [34]

    Adesso and F

    G. Adesso and F. Illuminati, Entanglement in continuous-variable systems: recent advances and current perspectives, Journal of Physics A: Mathemati- cal and Theoretical 40, 7821 (2007)

    2007

  27. [35]

    Kenfack and K

    A. Kenfack and K. ˙Zyczkowski, Negativity of the Wigner function as an indicator of non-classicality, Journal of Op- tics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics 6, 396 (2004)

    2004

  28. [36]

    Gehrke, J

    C. Gehrke, J. Sperling, and W. Vogel, Quantification of nonclassicality, Phys. Rev. A 86, 052118 (2012)

    2012

  29. [37]

    Sperling and W

    J. Sperling and W. Vogel, Convex ordering and quan- tification of quantumness, Physica Scripta 90, 074024 (2015)

    2015

  30. [38]

    Chabaud, D

    U. Chabaud, D. Markham, and F. Grosshans, Stellar representation of non-Gaussian quantum states, Physi- cal Review Letters 124, 063605 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Marshall and N

    J. Marshall and N. Anand, Simulation of quantum optics by coherent state decomposition, Optica Quantum 1, 78 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Mari and J

    A. Mari and J. Eisert, Positive Wigner functions ren- der classical simulation of quantum computation efficient, Physical Review Letters 109, 230503 (2012)

    2012

  33. [41]

    Pashayan, J

    H. Pashayan, J. J. Wallman, and S. D. Bartlett, Esti- mating outcome probabilities of quantum circuits using quasiprobabilities, Physical Review Letters 115, 070501 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    Chabaud, G

    U. Chabaud, G. Ferrini, F. Grosshans, and D. Markham, Classical simulation of gaussian quantum circuits with non-gaussian input states, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033018 (2021)

    2021

  35. [43]

    J. E. Bourassa, N. Quesada, I. Tzitrin, A. Sz´ ava, T. Isac- sson, J. Izaac, K. K. Sabapathy, G. Dauphinais, and I. Dhand, Fast simulation of bosonic qubits via gaus- sian functions in phase space, PRX Quantum 2, 040315 (2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    Chabaud and M

    U. Chabaud and M. Walschaers, Resources for bosonic quantum computational advantage, Physical Review Let- ters 130, 090602 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Frigerio, A

    M. Frigerio, A. Debray, N. Treps, and M. Walschaers, Simulability of non-classical continuous-variable quan- tum circuits (2024), arXiv:2410.09226 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Aharonov, X

    D. Aharonov, X. Gao, Z. Landau, Y. Liu, and U. Vazi- rani, A polynomial-time classical algorithm for noisy ran- dom circuit sampling, in Proceedings of the 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing , STOC ’23 (ACM, 2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Fontana, M

    E. Fontana, M. S. Rudolph, R. Duncan, I. Rungger, and C. C ˆ ırstoiu, Classical simulations of noisy variational quantum circuits (2023), arXiv:2306.05400 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Angrisani, A

    A. Angrisani, A. Schmidhuber, M. S. Rudolph, M. Cerezo, Z. Holmes, and H.-Y. Huang, Classically esti- mating observables of noiseless quantum circuits (2024), arXiv:2409.01706 [quant-ph]

    2024

  41. [49]

    Schuster, C

    T. Schuster, C. Yin, X. Gao, and N. Y. Yao, A polynomial-time classical algorithm for noisy quantum circuits (2024), arXiv:2407.12768 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Angrisani, A

    A. Angrisani, A. A. Mele, M. S. Rudolph, M. Cerezo, and Z. Holmes, Simulating quantum circuits with ar- bitrary local noise using pauli propagation (2025), arXiv:2501.13101 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Martinez, A

    V. Martinez, A. Angrisani, E. Pankovets, O. Fawzi, and D. S. Fran¸ ca, Efficient simulation of parametrized quan- tum circuits under non-unital noise through pauli back- propagation (2025), arXiv:2501.13050 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Yamasaki, T

    H. Yamasaki, T. Matsuura, and M. Koashi, Cost- reduced all-gaussian universality with the gottesman- kitaev-preskill code: Resource-theoretic approach to cost analysis, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023270 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    O. Hahn, A. Ferraro, L. Hultquist, G. Ferrini, and L. Garc ´ ıa-´Alvarez, Quantifying qubit magic resource with gottesman-kitaev-preskill encoding, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 210502 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    O. Hahn, G. Ferrini, and R. Takagi, Bridging magic and non-gaussian resources via gottesman-kitaev-preskill en- coding (2024), arXiv:2406.06418 [quant-ph]. 9

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computa- tion and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edi- tion (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2011)

    2011

  48. [56]

    Budinger, A

    N. Budinger, A. Furusawa, and P. van Loock, All-optical quantum computing using cubic phase gates, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023332 (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    Lloyd and S

    S. Lloyd and S. L. Braunstein, Quantum computation over continuous variables, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1784 (1999)

    1999

  50. [58]

    Arzani, R

    F. Arzani, R. I. Booth, and U. Chabaud, Can effective descriptions of bosonic systems be considered complete? (2025), arXiv:2501.13857 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Sefi and P

    S. Sefi and P. van Loock, How to decompose ar- bitrary continuous-variable quantum operations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 170501 (2011)

    2011

  52. [60]

    N. C. Menicucci, P. van Loock, M. Gu, C. Weedbrook, T. C. Ralph, and M. A. Nielsen, Universal quantum com- putation with continuous-variable cluster states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 110501 (2006)

    2006

  53. [61]

    V. V. Albert, K. Noh, K. Duivenvoorden, D. J. Young, R. T. Brierley, P. Reinhold, C. Vuillot, L. Li, C. Shen, S. M. Girvin, B. M. Terhal, and L. Jiang, Performance and structure of single-mode bosonic codes, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032346 (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    Adesso, Generic entanglement and standard form for n-mode pure gaussian states, Physical review letters 97, 130502 (2006)

    G. Adesso, Generic entanglement and standard form for n-mode pure gaussian states, Physical review letters 97, 130502 (2006)

    2006

  55. [63]

    Serafini and G

    A. Serafini and G. Adesso, Standard forms and entan- glement engineering of multimode gaussian states under local operations, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 40, 8041 (2007)

    2007

  56. [64]

    Chabaud, M

    U. Chabaud, M. Joseph, S. Mehraban, and A. Mo- tamedi, Bosonic quantum computational complexity (2024), arXiv:2410.04274 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Pashayan, S

    H. Pashayan, S. D. Bartlett, and D. Gross, From estima- tion of quantum probabilities to simulation of quantum circuits, Quantum 4, 223 (2020)

    2020

  58. [66]

    Nagai, T

    R. Nagai, T. Tomono, and Y. Minato, Simulation of continuous-variable quantum systems with tensor net- work, in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Quan- tum Computing and Engineering (QCE) (2021) pp. 437– 438

    2021

  59. [67]

    Braun and B

    D. Braun and B. Georgeot, Quantitative measure of in- terference, Phys. Rev. A 73, 022314 (2006)

    2006

  60. [68]

    Hillery, Coherence as a resource in decision problems: The deutsch-jozsa algorithm and a variation, Phys

    M. Hillery, Coherence as a resource in decision problems: The deutsch-jozsa algorithm and a variation, Phys. Rev. A 93, 012111 (2016)

    2016

  61. [69]

    Shi, S.-Y

    H.-L. Shi, S.-Y. Liu, X.-H. Wang, W.-L. Yang, Z.-Y. Yang, and H. Fan, Coherence depletion in the grover quantum search algorithm, Phys. Rev. A 95, 032307 (2017). Appendix A: Proof of Theorem 1 We restate the Theorem first: Theorem 3. Given the description of an m-mode input st...

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.