Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 58 references

From Fermions to Qubits: A ZX-Calculus Perspective

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using the ZX-calculus, the paper proves that every ternary-tree fermion-to-qubit mapping is a linear encoding and unifies linear, tree-based, and local encodings in a single graphical language.

desk verdict A useful graphical repackaging of a known ternary-tree result; the new algorithm and diagrammatic translations are the real contribution, but the proof has some unstated dependencies. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06212 v1 pith:XZLSHDEB submitted 2025-05-09 quant-ph

Haytham McDowall-Rose , Razin A. Shaikh , Lia Yeh This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P6868Q12 PACS 03.67.-a03.67.Lx
keywords fermion-to-qubitmappingZX-calculusscalableternarytreelinearencodinglocalstabilizersBravyi-Kitaevtransform
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

This paper argues that the ZX-calculus, a graphical language for quantum maps, offers a unified way to see the many different fermion-to-qubit mappings as the same kind of object. It establishes that a linear encoding of the Fock basis—one that sends occupation-number basis states to qubit basis states through an invertible binary matrix—is exactly a unitary phase-free ZX-diagram. Its main theorem is that the encoder of any ternary-tree mapping is such a phase-free diagram, so every ternary tree yields a linear encoding, and the binary matrix can be read directly from the tree by a recursive algorithm. The same framework represents local encodings with auxiliary qubits as Clifford ZX-diagrams whose connectivity mirrors the fermionic Hamiltonian's interaction graph and whose stabilizers are visible at a glance. A sympathetic reader would care because this turns a scattered zoo of constructions (Jordan-Wigner, parity, Bravyi-Kitaev, ternary trees, local codes) into one picture where comparisons and calculations can be done graphically.

What carries the argument

The central object is the phase-free fragment of the scalable ZX-calculus: a network of Z- and X-spiders with zero phases, extended with bold register wires and matrix arrows that stand for bipartite graphs of spiders. A matrix arrow labelled by a binary matrix $A \in \mathbb{F}_2^{m\times n}$ implements the linear map $|x\rangle \mapsto |Ax\rangle$, which is exactly what a linear encoding does to Fock basis states. The paper's load-bearing move is a local replacement rule: a ternary tree node with $a$, $b$, and $c$ descendants along its X, Y, and Z branches becomes a phase-free diagram containing the anti-diagonal matrix $F$, spliced into the wires for those branches. Rewriting the whole tree diagram to its phase-free normal form collapses it to one matrix arrow, and that rewriting is packaged as Algorithm 1, which recursively assembles the encoding matrix from the subtree matrices $E_X$, $E_Y$, and $E_Z$. Correctness is checked by pushing Jordan-Wigner Majorana strings through the diagram, which recovers the tree's Pauli strings; the local-encoding half of the paper instead uses isometries in the Clifford/stabilizer fragment, whose graph-state normal form reveals stabilizers.

What would settle it

Take a concrete ternary tree, compute its encoding matrix with Algorithm 1, and independently compute the matrix from the Pauli strings produced by the cited pairing scheme; any mismatch between the two matrices would falsify Theorem 2.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the three standard presentations of fermion-to-qubit mappings—binary-matrix linear encodings, ternary trees with a Majorana-pairing scheme, and local encodings built from stabilizers—are all captured by one fragment of the ZX-calculus. Phase-free ZX-diagrams that are unitary correspond precisely to linear encodings of the Fock basis: a diagram's normal form is a matrix arrow labelled by the encoding's binary matrix, and any such diagram can be rewritten as a CNOT circuit. Ternary tree mappings translate node-by-node into phase-free ZX-diagrams, with each node replaced by a small diagram containing an anti-diagonal matrix arrow; pushing the Jordan-Wigner Majorana operators through the encoder reproduces exactly the Pauli strings the tree generates. Therefore every ternary tree mapping is a linear encoding, and a recursive reading of the tree (Algorithm 1) outputs its encoding matrix without first constructing Pauli strings. For local encodings, the encoder is an isometry in the stabilizer fragment, represented with graph-state normal forms, and the same diagrams display both the stabilizer group and the interaction geometry of the Hamiltonian.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is an external theorem, cited as [11], that every ternary tree admits a unique product-preserving way of pairing its Majorana operators; if that uniqueness fails for some tree shape or labelling, the ZX diagram claimed to be the tree's encoder could instead describe a different mapping.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every ternary-tree fermion-to-qubit mapping can be implemented as a CNOT circuit, because the phase-free ZX-diagram produced from the tree reduces to CNOT circuits.
  • The encoding matrix of any ternary-tree mapping can be computed directly from the tree's shape by Algorithm 1, without first deriving the Pauli strings.
  • All one- and two-body terms of an electronic Hamiltonian obtain controlled ZXW diagrams under any linear encoding, so encoded Hamiltonians can be derived and simplified graphically.
  • Local encodings can be presented as stabilizer-fragment isometries whose diagrams carry the interaction graph, the stabilizers, and the encoder in a single picture.
  • The framework subsumes Jordan-Wigner, parity, and Bravyi-Kitaev transforms as special cases of one graphical normal form.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the correspondence is as tight as claimed, deciding whether two fermion-to-qubit mappings are equivalent could be reduced to rewriting one ZX-diagram into the other, giving a decision procedure that avoids comparing long lists of Pauli strings.
  • Algorithm 1 suggests an inexpensive search over ternary trees: enumerate tree shapes, compute encoding matrices directly, and rank mappings by operator weight or connectivity without ever materialising the Pauli strings.
  • Because local encodings now live in the same stabilizer-fragment language as quantum error-correcting codes, code-design tools such as graphical normal forms for stabilizer codes could be repurposed to construct fermion-to-qubit mappings with desired error-correction properties.
  • The future-work direction of bosonic systems, if carried out in infinite-dimensional ZX-calculus, would test whether the same phase-free normal-form reasoning extends to boson-to-qubit encodings.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a ZX-calculus framework for fermion-to-qubit mappings. It establishes a correspondence between linear Fock-basis encodings and unitary phase-free ZX-diagrams (Section 3), gives a translation from ternary tree mappings to scalable ZX-diagrams (Section 4), and claims to graphically prove that every ternary tree mapping is a linear encoding. The main new algorithmic contribution is Algorithm 1, which constructs the binary encoding matrix ET directly from a ternary tree without first enumerating Pauli strings. The paper also derives controlled ZXW diagrams for electronic Hamiltonian terms under arbitrary linear encodings (Section 3.2) and presents graphical encoder/stabilizer descriptions of the E-type and square-lattice auxiliary-qubit local encodings (Section 5). The overall aim is to unify the operator-centric, Fock-state, and stabilizer perspectives on fermion-to-qubit mappings in a single graphical language.

Significance. If the main theorems are fully established, this paper delivers a useful synthesis: Algorithm 1 is a concrete, directly implementable procedure that lets practitioners read off encoding matrices for ternary-tree mappings without computing Pauli strings, and the ZX representation connects operator-centric tree mappings to CSS/stabilizer descriptions and to CNOT circuits. The paper independently reproduces the recent equivalence result of Chiew et al. using a genuinely different, diagrammatic proof route, which is a valuable cross-check, and the worked examples for Jordan-Wigner, parity, and Bravyi-Kitaev encodings are clear sanity checks. The local-encoding diagrams, if verified, would offer a compact unified view of encoder isometry, stabilizers, and interaction geometry. However, the current proof-completeness gaps described below mean that the central equivalence and the local-encoding tiling claim are not yet fully certified. I regard these gaps as fixable within the scope of a revision rather than as fundamental errors.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.3, Theorem 1 (main text and Appendix A.4)] The proof of Theorem 1 verifies only that the set of Pauli strings obtained by pushing Jordan-Wigner Majorana operators through the encoder matches the ternary tree's Pauli strings, and then invokes Chiew et al. [11] for uniqueness of the product-preserving mapping 'up to symmetries such as fermionic braids and Pauli relabelling.' The hypotheses and exact statement of that uniqueness theorem are not restated, and 'up to symmetries' may not be enough to identify the specific linear encoding: fermionic braids and Pauli relabellings act nontrivially on the Fock-basis matrix, so the same Pauli-string set can correspond to different encoding matrices. The proof therefore does not establish that the ZX encoder (and hence Algorithm 1) realizes the specific product-preserving pairing of Miller et al.; a failure of the external theorem's hypotheses for some tree shapes or labelings would invalidate the claimed correctness of Algorithm 1 and Theorem 2. I ask the authors to state the external theorem precisely and to prove (or cite a proof) that the diagrammatic assignment coincides with the pairing used by Chiew et al., not merely that the Pauli-string sets agree.
  2. [Appendix A.2, Lemma 4] The proof of Lemma 4 is deferred to an unpublished Master's thesis [1] and a manuscript in preparation [2]. Lemma 4 is load-bearing for the controlled-diagram composition used in Propositions 6-10 of Section 3.2, so the claimed controlled diagrams for electronic Hamiltonian terms are not established within this paper. Either include a complete proof (which appears to be a short diagrammatic argument) or explicitly reformulate the affected propositions so that they do not depend on an unpublished result.
  3. [Section 5.2, Eq. (35) and Figure 6] The paper asserts that the plaquette encoder 'tiling this as in Figure 6 gives a ZX-diagram for the square lattice AQM on lattices of any size' and that the encoder reproduces the hopping terms of Steudtner and Wehner. No proof is given for the tiling, for the boundary stabilizers, or for the claim in Remark 1 that any choice of linearly independent logical operators is valid and equivalent up to a unitary on the logical qubits. Since this section is presented as a contribution rather than a conjecture, these assertions need a verification argument, or at minimum a precise reference, before they can be accepted as part of the paper's results.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Eq. (21)] The conjugation steps in Eq. (21) are difficult to parse because the two sides of the equality do not clearly display the direction of conjugation; please rewrite the display with an explicit 'E O E†' form.
  2. [Section 4.2-4.3, Algorithm 1] Algorithm 1 assumes the fixed node-ordering convention described in Section 4.2. The remark that arbitrary labelings can be handled by a permutation is not reflected in Theorem 1 or in Algorithm 1; please state explicitly how the permutation is absorbed into the encoding matrix ET.
  3. [Appendix A.1, Propositions 2 and 4] The proofs use abbreviations such as S1, S2, RCopy, PT, GCopy, matmult, inv, Z,X, fuse, and OCM without defining them or pointing to the corresponding rules in Figure 1 and the scalable ZX literature. A short rule-name table would make the derivations reproducible.
  4. [Section 5, Eq. (33)] In Eq. (33), the notation 'M inc_1' and 'M inc_2' is introduced as incidence matrices of graphs given by biadjacency matrices M1 and M2, but the subsequent diagram label uses 'M1 M2'; please make the notation consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central ternary-tree-to-linear-encoding theorem is a genuine ZX-calculus derivation checked against independent results, with only minor deferred proofs and non-central self-citations.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. Section 3.1 establishes the correspondence between linear encodings and phase-free ZX-diagrams via matrix arrows, which is a definitional equivalence rather than a fitted or predicted result. Section 4 introduces an explicit diagrammatic translation from ternary trees to scalable ZX-diagrams, and Theorem 1 proves correctness by pushing Jordan-Wigner Majorana operators through the encoder and comparing the resulting Pauli strings with the tree's Pauli strings. The only external input at that step is the uniqueness theorem of Chiew et al. [11], which is independent of the present authors and is used as a sufficient condition: once the Pauli-string set is matched, the product-preserving mapping is unique. This is a legitimate use of an external theorem, not a self-citation or a definitional reduction. Theorem 2 and Algorithm 1 then compute the encoding matrix by reducing the encoder diagram to phase-free normal form; the recursion is a direct diagrammatic calculation with no hidden fitted parameters. The paper also benchmarks the translation against the known Jordan-Wigner, parity, and Bravyi-Kitaev encoders. Two caveats are proof-completeness rather than circularity: Lemma 4's proof is deferred to refs [1,2] (one of which is an unpublished manuscript coauthored by Lia Yeh), so Section 3.2's controlled-diagram composition is not fully self-contained; and the hypotheses of the Chiew et al. uniqueness theorem are not restated. Neither caveat makes the main result equivalent to its inputs. The paper's central claim therefore does not reduce to a fit, a renamed known result, or a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard ZX-calculus results and on two external theorems: the uniqueness of product-preserving ternary-tree mappings (Chiew et al.) and a controlled-diagram composition lemma whose proof is in unpublished manuscripts. No free parameters are fitted; the hydrogen-molecule coefficients are taken from the literature.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Soundness and completeness of the ZX-calculus rewrite rules and of the scalable ZX-calculus extensions (matrix arrows, divide and gather nodes).
    Invoked throughout Sections 3 and 4 to justify pushing operators through encoders and reducing diagrams to normal form. This is established in the cited ZX literature, not proven here.
  • domain assumption Every invertible F2 matrix A induces a linear encoding, and every unitary phase-free ZX-diagram reduces to a matrix arrow, equivalently a CNOT circuit.
    Basis of the Section 3 correspondence; cited to [5] and [32].
  • domain assumption The product-preserving pairing scheme of Miller et al. [37] produces a unique mapping for any ternary tree up to the stated symmetries, as proved by Chiew et al. [11].
    Used in the proof of Theorem 1: correctness of the ZX encoder is reduced to matching the set of Pauli strings because this uniqueness is assumed.
  • domain assumption Lemma 4, that controlled diagrams can be composed via the W-node, holds as stated.
    Used to derive all electronic Hamiltonian controlled diagrams in Section 3.2; the proof is delegated to unpublished manuscripts [1,2], not included in this preprint.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of From Fermions to Qubits: A ZX-Calculus Perspective." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XZLSHDEB

@misc{pith2026250506212,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: From Fermions to Qubits: A ZX-Calculus Perspective},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XZLSHDEB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06212}
}
read the original abstract

Mapping fermionic systems to qubits on a quantum computer is often the first step for algorithms in quantum chemistry and condensed matter physics. However, it is difficult to reconcile the many different approaches that have been proposed, such as those based on binary matrices, ternary trees, and stabilizer codes. This challenge is further exacerbated by the many ways to describe them -- transformation of Majorana operators, action on Fock states, encoder circuits, and stabilizers of local encodings -- making it challenging to know when the mappings are equivalent. In this work, we present a graphical framework for fermion-to-qubit mappings that streamlines and unifies various representations through the ZX-calculus. To start, we present the correspondence between linear encodings of the Fock basis and phase-free ZX-diagrams. The commutation rules of scalable ZX-calculus allows us to convert the fermionic operators to Pauli operators under any linear encoding. Next, we give a translation from ternary tree mappings to scalable ZX-diagrams, which not only directly represents the encoder map as a CNOT circuit, but also retains the same structure as the tree. Consequently, we graphically prove that ternary tree transformations are equivalent to linear encodings, a recent result by Chiew et al. The scalable ZX representation moreover enables us to construct an algorithm to directly compute the binary matrix for any ternary tree mapping. Lastly, we present the graphical representation of local fermion-to-qubit encodings. Its encoder ZX-diagram has the same connectivity as the interaction graph of the fermionic Hamiltonian and also allows us to easily identify stabilizers of the encoding.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.06212 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A complete set of rewrite rules [53]. All the rules hold with their colours swapped. up to global scalars, which we will often ignore in this paper. Note that some papers use a different normalization for the X spiders, which makes the rules scalar-exact at the cost of limiting spider phases to 0 and π. 2.2.2 The Scalable ZX-calculus In this section, we review the more compact notation of the scalable ZX-calculus [9… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Terms in electronic Hamiltonians, and their corresponding controlled diagrams. The derivation of these [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: An example ternary tree with its Pauli strings. Right: Its translated encoder ZX-diagram. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: We see from a possible connectivity graph for the Jordan-Wigner transform, that fermions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Consider a hopping term between fermionic sites 3 and 15, which after Jordan-Wigner transform is a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: Tiling of each plaquette stabilizer for the 4 by 4 square lattice AQM from Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [11]

    arXiv:2412.07578

    Mitchell Chiew, Brent Harrison & Sergii Strelchuk (2024): Ternary Tree Transformations Are Equivalent to Linear Encodings of the Fock Basis , doi:10.48550/arXiv.2412.07578. arXiv:2412.07578

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.07578 2024

  2. [1]

    Master’s thesis, University of Oxford

    Edwin Agnew (2023): Quantum Polynomials in the ZXW Calculus. Master’s thesis, University of Oxford

    work page 2023

  3. [2]

    Edwin Agnew, Lia Yeh & Richie Yeung (Manuscript in preparation): Algebraic Structure of Controlled States and Operators in the ZXW-calculus

    work page

  4. [3]

    New Journal of Physics 16(9), p

    Miriam Backens (2014): The ZX-calculus Is Complete for Stabilizer Quantum Mechanics. New Journal of Physics 16(9), p. 093021, doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/9/093021

    doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/9/093021 2014

  5. [4]

    arXiv:2004.05164

    Niel de Beaudrap, Xiaoning Bian & Quanlong Wang (2020): Fast and effective techniques for T-count reduction via spider nest identities . arXiv:2004.05164

    arXiv 2020

  6. [5]

    In Anca Muscholl, editor: Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures , Lec- ture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp

    Filippo Bonchi, Pawe l Soboci´ nski & Fabio Zanasi (2014):Interacting Bialgebras Are Frobenius. In Anca Muscholl, editor: Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures , Lec- ture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 351–365, doi:10.1007/ 978-3-642-54830-7_23

    work page 2014

  7. [6]

    Augustin Borgna & Rafael Romero (2023): Encoding High-Level Quantum Programs as SZX- diagrams. In Stefano Gogioso & Matty Hoban, editors: Proceedings 19th International Con- ference on Quantum Physics and Logic, Wolfson College, Oxford, UK, 27 June - 1 July 2022 , Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 394, Open Publishing Association, pp....

    work page doi:10.4204/eptcs.394.9 2023

  8. [7]

    Bravyi & Alexei Yu

    Sergey B. Bravyi & Alexei Yu. Kitaev (2002): Fermionic Quantum Computation . Annals of Physics 298(1), p. 210–226, doi:10.1006/aphy.2002.6254. Available at http://dx.doi. org/10.1006/aphy.2002.6254

    arXiv 2002

Show all 58 references
  1. [8]

    Titouan Carette, Yohann D’Anello & Simon Perdrix (2021): Quantum Algorithms and Oracles with the Scalable ZX-calculus . In Chris Heunen & Miriam Backens, editors: Proceedings 18th International Conference on Quantum Physics and Logic, Gdansk, Poland, and online, 7-11 June 2021...

    2021 doi

  2. [9]

    Titouan Carette, Dominic Horsman & Simon Perdrix (2019): SZX-Calculus: Scalable Graph- ical Quantum Reasoning . In Peter Rossmanith, Pinar Heggernes & Joost-Pieter Katoen, 17 editors: 44th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Sci- ence (MFCS 2019) , ...

    2019

  3. [10]

    PRX Quantum 4, p

    Yu-An Chen & Yijia Xu (2023): Equivalence between Fermion-to-Qubit Mappings in two Spa- tial Dimensions. PRX Quantum 4, p. 010326, doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.010326. Available at https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.010326

    2023 doi

  4. [12]

    Quantum 7, p

    Mitchell Chiew & Sergii Strelchuk (2023): Discovering optimal fermion-qubit mappings through algorithmic enumeration . Quantum 7, p. 1145, doi:10.22331/q-2023-10-18-1145 . Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-10-18-1145

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    In Luca Aceto, Ivan Damg˚ ard, Leslie Ann Goldberg, Magn´ us M

    Bob Coecke & Ross Duncan (2008): Interacting Quantum Observables . In Luca Aceto, Ivan Damg˚ ard, Leslie Ann Goldberg, Magn´ us M. Halld´ orsson, Anna Ing´ olfsd´ ottir & Igor Walukiewicz, editors: Automata, Languages and Programming , Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Spring...

    2008 doi

  6. [15]

    Quantum 4, p

    Niel de Beaudrap & Dominic Horsman (2020): The ZX Calculus Is a Language for Surface Code Lattice Surgery. Quantum 4, p. 218, doi:10.22331/q-2020-01-09-218

    2020 doi

  7. [16]

    Shaikh, Boldizs´ ar Po´ or, Lia Yeh, Quanlong Wang & Bob Coecke (2023): Light-Matter Interaction in the ZXW Calculus

    Giovanni de Felice, Razin A. Shaikh, Boldizs´ ar Po´ or, Lia Yeh, Quanlong Wang & Bob Coecke (2023): Light-Matter Interaction in the ZXW Calculus . In Shane Mansfield, Ben- oit Valˆ ıron & Vladimir Zamdzhiev, editors: Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Qu...

    2023 doi

  8. [17]

    Physical Review B 104(3), doi:10.1103/physrevb.104.035118

    Charles Derby, Joel Klassen, Johannes Bausch & Toby Cubitt (2021): Compact fermion to qubit mappings . Physical Review B 104(3), doi:10.1103/physrevb.104.035118. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.035118

    2021 doi

  9. [18]

    Pfaendler, Muhammad Hamza Waseem, Thomas Cervoni, Aleks Kissinger, Stefano Gogioso & Bob Coecke (2023): Quantum Picturalism: Learning Quantum Theory in High School

    Selma D¨ undar-Coecke, Lia Yeh, Caterina Puca, Sieglinde M.-L. Pfaendler, Muhammad Hamza Waseem, Thomas Cervoni, Aleks Kissinger, Stefano Gogioso & Bob Coecke (2023): Quantum Picturalism: Learning Quantum Theory in High School . In: 2023 IEEE International Confer- ence on Quan...

    2023

  10. [19]

    East, John van de Wetering, Nicholas Chancellor & Adolfo G

    Richard D.P. East, John van de Wetering, Nicholas Chancellor & Adolfo G. Grushin (2022): AKLT-States as ZX-Diagrams: Diagrammatic Reasoning for Quantum States . PRX Quantum 3(1), p. 010302, doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.010302

    2022 doi

  11. [20]

    Julio C. Magdalena de la Fuente, Josias Old, Alex Townsend-Teague, Manuel Rispler, Jens Eisert & Markus M¨ uller (2024): The XYZ ruby code: Making a case for a three-colored graphical calculus for quantum error correction in spacetime . arXiv:2407.08566

    2024 arXiv

  12. [21]

    Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 394, pp

    Stefano Gogioso & Richie Yeung (2023): Annealing Optimisation of Mixed ZX Phase Circuits . Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 394, pp. 415–431, doi:10.4204/ eptcs.394.20

    2023

  13. [22]

    arXiv:2406.12978

    Pranay Gorantla, Shu-Heng Shao & Nathanan Tantivasadakarn (2024): Tensor networks for non-invertible symmetries in 3+1d and beyond . arXiv:2406.12978

    2024

  14. [23]

    Whitfield (2024): A Sierpinski Triangle Fermion-to-Qubit Transform

    Brent Harrison, Mitchell Chiew, Jason Necaise, Andrew Projansky, Sergii Strelchuk & James D. Whitfield (2024): A Sierpinski Triangle Fermion-to-Qubit Transform . arXiv:2409.04348. 18

    2024 arXiv

  15. [24]

    or How to Graphically Grok Tableaus)

    Jiaxin Huang, Aleks Kissinger, Sarah Meng Li, John van de Wetering & Lia Yeh (Manuscript in preparation): ZX Normal Forms for Stabilizer Codes (. . . or How to Graphically Grok Tableaus)

  16. [25]

    Jiaxin Huang, Sarah Meng Li, Lia Yeh, Aleks Kissinger, Michele Mosca & Michael Vasmer (2023): Graphical CSS Code Transformation Using ZX Calculus . In Shane Mansfield, Benoit Valˆ ıron & Vladimir Zamdzhiev, editors:Proceedings of the Twentieth International Confer- ence on Qua...

    2023 doi

  17. [26]

    Quantum 4, p

    Zhang Jiang, Amir Kalev, Wojciech Mruczkiewicz & Hartmut Neven (2020): Optimal Fermion-to-Qubit Mapping via Ternary Trees with Applications to Reduced Quantum States Learning. Quantum 4, p. 276, doi:10.22331/q-2020-06-04-276

    2020 doi

  18. [27]

    Jordan & E

    P. Jordan & E. Wigner (1928): ¨Uber das Paulische ¨Aquivalenzverbot. Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 47(9), pp. 631–651, doi:10.1007/BF01331938

    1928 doi

  19. [28]

    arXiv:2204.14038

    Aleks Kissinger (2022): Phase-free ZX diagrams are CSS codes (...or how to graphically grok the surface code). arXiv:2204.14038

    2022 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Physical Review A 102(2), p

    Aleks Kissinger & John van de Wetering (2020): Reducing T-count with the ZX-calculus . Physical Review A 102(2), p. 022406, doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.102.022406. arXiv:1903.10477

    2020 arXiv

  21. [30]

    TQC.2022.5

    Aleks Kissinger, John van de Wetering & Renaud Vilmart (2022): Classical Simulation of Quantum Circuits with Partial and Graphical Stabiliser Decompositions, doi:10.4230/LIPIcs. TQC.2022.5

    2022 doi

  22. [31]

    Quantum 3, p

    Aleks Kissinger & John van de Wetering (2019): Universal MBQC with Generalised Parity-Phase Interactions and Pauli Measurements . Quantum 3, p. 134, doi:10.22331/ q-2019-04-26-134

    2019

  23. [32]

    Preprint

    Aleks Kissinger & John van de Wetering (2024): Picturing Quantum Software: An Introduc- tion to the ZX-Calculus and Quantum Compilation . Preprint

    2024

  24. [33]

    Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 406, pp

    Aleks Kissinger & John van de Wetering (2024): Scalable Spider Nests (...Or How to Graph- ically Grok Transversal Non-Clifford Gates). Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 406, pp. 79–95, doi:10.4204/eptcs.406.4

    2024 doi

  25. [34]

    Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 95, p

    Alex Lang & Bob Coecke (2012): Trichromatic Open Digraphs for Understanding Qubits . Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 95, p. 193–209, doi:10.4204/eptcs. 95.14. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.95.14

    2012 doi

  26. [35]

    Tommy McElvanney & Miriam Backens (2023): Flow-Preserving ZX-calculus Rewrite Rules for Optimisation and Obfuscation. In Shane Mansfield, Benoit Valˆ ıron & Vladimir Zamdzhiev, editors: Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Quantum Physics and Lo- gic, Paris...

    2023 doi

  27. [36]

    arXiv:2403.03992

    Aaron Miller, Adam Glos & Zolt´ an Zimbor´ as (2024):Treespilation: Architecture- and State- Optimised Fermion-to-Qubit Mappings, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.03992. arXiv:2403.03992

    2024 doi arXiv

  28. [37]

    PRX Quantum 4(3), p

    Aaron Miller, Zolt´ an Zimbor´ as, Stefan Knecht, Sabrina Maniscalco & Guillermo Garc´ ıa-P´ erez (2023): Bonsai Algorithm: Grow Your Own Fermion-to-Qubit Mappings . PRX Quantum 4(3), p. 030314, doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030314

    2023 doi

  29. [38]

    Logical Methods in Computer Science Volume 15, Issue 3, doi:10.23638/LMCS-15(3:26)2019

    Kang Feng Ng, Amar Hadzihasanovic & Giovanni de Felice (2019): A Diagrammatic Calculus of Fermionic Quantum Circuits . Logical Methods in Computer Science Volume 15, Issue 3, doi:10.23638/LMCS-15(3:26)2019

    2019 doi

  30. [39]

    arXiv:2409.06789

    Ramil Nigmatullin, Kevin Hemery, Khaldoon Ghanem, Steven Moses, Dan Gresh, Peter Siegfried, Michael Mills, Thomas Gatterman, Nathan Hewitt, Etienne Granet & Henrik Dreyer (2024): Experimental Demonstration of Break-Even for the Compact Fermionic Encoding . arXiv:2409.06789

    2024 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Oliver O’Brien & Sergii Strelchuk (2024): Ultrafast hybrid fermion-to-qubit mapping . Phys. Rev. B 109, p. 115149, doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.109.115149. Available at https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.109.115149. 19

    2024 doi

  32. [41]

    Shaikh & Quanlong Wang (2024): ZX-calculus Is Complete for Finite-Dimensional Hilbert Spaces

    Boldizs´ ar Po´ or, Razin A. Shaikh & Quanlong Wang (2024): ZX-calculus Is Complete for Finite-Dimensional Hilbert Spaces. arXiv:2405.10896

    2024 arXiv

  33. [42]

    Shaikh, Lia Yeh, Richie Yeung & Bob Coecke (2023): Completeness for Arbitrary Finite Dimensions of ZXW-calculus, a Unifying Calculus

    Boldizs´ ar Po´ or, Quanlong Wang, Razin A. Shaikh, Lia Yeh, Richie Yeung & Bob Coecke (2023): Completeness for Arbitrary Finite Dimensions of ZXW-calculus, a Unifying Calculus . In: 2023 38th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS) , Boston, MA, USA, pp....

    2023

  34. [43]

    arXiv:2410.17240

    Benjamin Rodatz, Boldizs´ ar Po´ or & Aleks Kissinger (2024):Floquetifying stabiliser codes with distance-preserving rewrites. arXiv:2410.17240

    2024 arXiv

  35. [44]

    Seeley, Martin J

    Jacob T. Seeley, Martin J. Richard & Peter J. Love (2012): The Bravyi-Kitaev transformation for quantum computation of electronic structure . The Journal of Chemical Physics 137(22), doi:10.1063/1.4768229. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4768229

    2012 doi

  36. [45]

    Whitfield (2019): Superfast encodings for fermionic quantum simulation

    Kanav Setia, Sergey Bravyi, Antonio Mezzacapo & James D. Whitfield (2019): Superfast encodings for fermionic quantum simulation . Physical Review Research 1(3), doi:10.1103/ physrevresearch.1.033033. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch. 1.033033

    2019 doi

  37. [46]

    Shaikh & Stefano Gogioso (2022): Categorical Semantics for Feynman Diagrams

    Razin A. Shaikh & Stefano Gogioso (2022): Categorical Semantics for Feynman Diagrams . arXiv:2205.00466

    2022 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Shaikh, Quanlong Wang & Richie Yeung (2022): How to Sum and Exponentiate Hamiltonians in ZXW Calculus

    Razin A. Shaikh, Quanlong Wang & Richie Yeung (2022): How to Sum and Exponentiate Hamiltonians in ZXW Calculus . arXiv:2212.04462

    2022 arXiv

  39. [48]

    Shaikh, Lia Yeh & Stefano Gogioso (2024): The Focked-up ZX Calculus: Picturing Continuous-Variable Quantum Computation

    Razin A. Shaikh, Lia Yeh & Stefano Gogioso (2024): The Focked-up ZX Calculus: Picturing Continuous-Variable Quantum Computation . arXiv:2406.02905

    2024 arXiv

  40. [49]

    Somma, Gerardo Ortiz, Emanuel H

    Rolando D. Somma, Gerardo Ortiz, Emanuel H. Knill & James Gubernatis (2003): Quantum simulations of physics problems . In Eric Donkor, Andrew R. Pirich & Howard E. Brandt, editors: Quantum Information and Computation , SPIE, doi:10.1117/12.487249

    2003 doi

  41. [50]

    Mark Steudtner & Stephanie Wehner (2019): Quantum codes for quantum simulation of fermions on a square lattice of qubits . Phys. Rev. A 99, p. 022308, doi:10.1103/PhysRevA. 99.022308. Available at https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.99.022308

    2019 doi

  42. [51]

    Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 406, pp

    Matthew Sutcliffe & Aleks Kissinger (2024): Procedurally Optimised ZX-Diagram Cutting for Efficient T-Decomposition in Classical Simulation . Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 406, pp. 63–78, doi:10.4204/eptcs.406.3

    2024 doi

  43. [52]

    Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2005(09), p

    F Verstraete & J I Cirac (2005): Mapping local Hamiltonians of fermions to local Hamilto- nians of spins . Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2005(09), p. P09012–P09012, doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2005/09/p09012. Available at http://dx.doi. org/10.1088/1742-546...

    2005 doi

  44. [53]

    In: 2019 34th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS) , pp

    Renaud Vilmart (2019): A Near-Minimal Axiomatisation of ZX-Calculus for Pure Qubit Quantum Mechanics. In: 2019 34th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS) , pp. 1–10, doi:10.1109/LICS.2019.8785765. arXiv:1812.09114

    2019

  45. [54]

    Quanta 11(1), pp

    Alexander Yurievich Vlasov (2022): Clifford Algebras, Spin Groups and Qubit Trees . Quanta 11(1), pp. 97–114, doi:10.12743/quanta.v11i1.199

    2022 doi

  46. [55]

    Shaikh (2024):Completeness of Qufinite ZXW Calculus, a Graphical Language for Finite-Dimensional Quantum Theory

    Quanlong Wang, Boldizs´ ar Po´ or & Razin A. Shaikh (2024):Completeness of Qufinite ZXW Calculus, a Graphical Language for Finite-Dimensional Quantum Theory . arXiv:2309.13014

    2024 arXiv

  47. [56]

    Whitfield, Vojtˇ ech Havl´ ıˇ cek & Matthias Troyer (2016):Local spin operators for fermion simulations

    James D. Whitfield, Vojtˇ ech Havl´ ıˇ cek & Matthias Troyer (2016):Local spin operators for fermion simulations. Physical Review A 94(3), doi:10.1103/physreva.94.030301. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.94.030301. 20 A Proofs A.1 Proofs of Section 3, on Linear ...

    2016 doi

  48. [57]

    Case: k =i For the majorana operator Γ 2k, we have F EX EY EZ 1i-1π eiπ = F EX EY EZ π =π F EX EY EZ π π F EX EY EZ E-1X ⊤1aπ π= For the majorana operator Γ 2k+1, we have F EX EY EZ 1iπ eiπ = F EX EY EZ π =π = π F EX EY EZ π ππ F EX EY EZ π ππ π π = F EX EY EZ ππ π = F EX EY E...

  49. [58]

    The proof for Γ 2k is analogous

    Case: k>a and k<a +b + 1 34 First we push the majorana operator Γ 2k+1. The proof for Γ 2k is analogous. F EX EY EZ 1kπ ekπ = F EX EY EZ π =π 1kπ ekπ F EX EY EZ π π 1kπ ekπ π = F EX EY EZ π π 1kπ ekπ π π π = F EX EY EZ π (1+1k)π ekπ π = F EX EY EZ π 1b-k-1π eb-kπ π (I.H.) = F ...

  50. [59]

    The proof for Γ 2k is analogous

    Case: k>a +b First we push the majorana operator Γ 2k+1. The proof for Γ 2k is analogous. F EX EY EZ 1kπ ekπ = F EX EY EZ π π 1kπ ekπ (I.H.) = ΓTZ2k+1 π = F EX EY EZ π 1kπ ekπ F EX EY EZ π where k′ =k− (a +b). 35

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.