- Access by Xinjiang University
Quantum process overlapping tomography: Theory and experiment
Phys. Rev. Applied 23, 064042 – Published 17 June, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/jkf7-wfcn
Abstract
Quantum process tomography (QPT) is the gold standard for fully characterizing quantum processes, yet it is resource intensive. In this work, we shift our focus from global to local quantum processes, which are beneficial for practical scenarios, such as distributed quantum computing and quantum networks. We term these local processes as reduced quantum processes and present a comprehensive theory to describe them. To experimentally characterize all -reduced quantum processes of an -qubit quantum process, we introduce our primary method, quantum process overlapping tomography (QPOT), and compare it with two alternative approaches: ancilla QPT and parallel QPT. Suppose the target quantum process involves local interactions, each acting on qubits, with the total number of affected qubits satisfying . The experimental configurations required for each method are as follows: QPOT requires experimental configurations. Ancilla QPT requires experimental configurations but additionally demands ancilla qubits and the preparation of maximally entangled states. Parallel QPT requires approximately experimental configurations, where denotes the number of qubits interacting with the reduced quantum process. Among these methods, QPOT exhibits superior efficiency and broader applicability. The efficacy of our methods is confirmed through experimental demonstrations conducted on IBM hardware, aligning well with our theory.
Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)
Article Text
References (56)
- J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
- F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buell et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature 574, 505 (2019).
- G. A. Quantum Collaborators, F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, S. Boixo, M. Broughton, B. B. Buckley et al., Hartree-Fock on a superconducting qubit quantum computer, Science 369, 1084 (2020).
- Y. Wu, W.-S. Bao, S. Cao, F. Chen, M.-C. Chen, X. Chen, T.-H. Chung, H. Deng, Y. Du, D. Fan et al., Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 180501 (2021).
- A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets, Nature 549, 242 (2017).
- C. Kokail, C. Maier, R. van Bijnen, T. Brydges, M. K. Joshi, P. Jurcevic, C. A. Muschik, P. Silvi, R. Blatt, C. F. Roos et al., Self-verifying variational quantum simulation of lattice models, Nature 569, 355 (2019).
- V. Havlíček, A. D. Córcoles, K. Temme, A. W. Harrow, A. Kandala, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces, Nature 567, 209 (2019).
- M. P. Harrigan, K. J. Sung, M. Neeley, K. J. Satzinger, F. Arute, K. Arya, J. Atalaya, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, S. Boixo et al., Quantum approximate optimization of non-planar graph problems on a planar superconducting processor, Nat. Phys. 17, 332 (2021).
- M. Riebe, K. Kim, P. Schindler, T. Monz, P. Schmidt, T. Körber, W. Hänsel, H. Häffner, C. F. Roos, and R. Blatt, Process tomography of ion trap quantum gates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 220407 (2006).
- Y. S. Weinstein, T. F. Havel, J. Emerson, N. Boulant, M. Saraceno, S. Lloyd, and D. G. Cory, Quantum process tomography of the quantum Fourier transform, J. Chem. Phys. 121, 6117 (2004).
- J. L. O’Brien, G. J. Pryde, A. Gilchrist, D. F. James, N. K. Langford, T. C. Ralph, and A. G. White, Quantum process tomography of a controlled-not gate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 080502 (2004).
- R. C. Bialczak, M. Ansmann, M. Hofheinz, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, A. D. O’Connell, D. Sank, H. Wang, J. Wenner, M. Steffen et al., Quantum process tomography of a universal entangling gate implemented with Josephson phase qubits, Nat. Phys. 6, 409 (2010).
- M. Howard, J. Twamley, C. Wittmann, T. Gaebel, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, Quantum process tomography and Linblad estimation of a solid-state qubit, New J. Phys. 8, 33 (2006).
- T. Surawy-Stepney, J. Kahn, R. Kueng, and M. Guta, Projected least-squares quantum process tomography, Quantum 6, 844 (2022).
- S. T. Merkel, J. M. Gambetta, J. A. Smolin, S. Poletto, A. D. Córcoles, B. R. Johnson, C. A. Ryan, and M. Steffen, Self-consistent quantum process tomography, Phys. Rev. A 87, 062119 (2013).
- S. Xue, Y. Wang, J. Zhan, Y. Wang, R. Zeng, J. Ding, W. Shi, Y. Liu, Y. Liu, A. Huang, G. Huang, C. Yu, D. Wang, X. Fu, X. Qiang, P. Xu, M. Deng, X. Yang, and J. Wu, Variational entanglement-assisted quantum process tomography with arbitrary ancillary qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 133601 (2022).
- S. Xue, Y. Liu, Y. Wang, P. Zhu, C. Guo, and J. Wu, Variational quantum process tomography of unitaries, Phys. Rev. A 105, 032427 (2022).
- M. Mohseni, A. T. Rezakhani, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum-process tomography: Resource analysis of different strategies, Phys. Rev. A 77, 032322 (2008).
- G. Torlai, C. J. Wood, A. Acharya, G. Carleo, J. Carrasquilla, and L. Aolita, Quantum process tomography with unsupervised learning and tensor networks, Nat. Commun. 14, 2858 (2023).
- J. I. Cirac, A. Ekert, S. F. Huelga, and C. Macchiavello, Distributed quantum computation over noisy channels, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4249 (1999).
- D. P. DiVincenzo, The physical implementation of quantum computation, Fortschritte der Physik: Prog. Phys. 48, 771 (2000).
- H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature 453, 1023 (2008).
- R. Harper, S. T. Flammia, and J. J. Wallman, Efficient learning of quantum noise, Nat. Phys. 16, 1184 (2020).
- S. T. Flammia and J. J. Wallman, Efficient estimation of Pauli channels, ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 1, 1 (2020).
- H. Bombin, R. S. Andrist, M. Ohzeki, H. G. Katzgraber, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Strong resilience of topological codes to depolarization, Phys. Rev. X 2, 021004 (2012).
- N. H. Nickerson and B. J. Brown, Analysing correlated noise on the surface code using adaptive decoding algorithms, Quantum 3, 131 (2019).
- A. S. Darmawan and D. Poulin, Tensor-network simulations of the surface code under realistic noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 040502 (2017).
- N. Maskara, A. Kubica, and T. Jochym-O’Connor, Advantages of versatile neural-network decoding for topological codes, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052351 (2019).
- D. K. Tuckett, S. D. Bartlett, and S. T. Flammia, Ultrahigh error threshold for surface codes with biased noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 050505 (2018).
- C.-Y. Hsieh, M. Lostaglio, and A. Acín, Quantum channel marginal problem, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013249 (2022).
- E. Haapasalo, T. Kraft, N. Miklin, and R. Uola, Quantum marginal problem and incompatibility, Quantum 5, 476 (2021).
- J. Cotler and F. Wilczek, Quantum overlapping tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 100401 (2020).
- X. Bonet-Monroig, R. Babbush, and T. E. O’Brien, Nearly optimal measurement scheduling for partial tomography of quantum states, Phys. Rev. X 10, 031064 (2020).
- F. B. Maciejewski, F. Baccari, Z. Zimborás, and M. Oszmaniec, Modeling and mitigation of cross-talk effects in readout noise with applications to the quantum approximate optimization algorithm, Quantum 5, 464 (2021).
- B. G. Araújo, M. M. Taddei, D. Cavalcanti, and A. Acín, Local quantum overlapping tomography, Phys. Rev. A 106, 062441 (2022).
- K. Hansenne, R. Qu, L. T. Weinbrenner, C. de Gois, H. Wang, Y. Ming, Z. Yang, P. Horodecki, W. Gao, and O. Gühne, Optimal overlapping tomography, arXiv:2408.05730.
- C. Wei and T. Xin, Optimal quantum overlapping tomography, arXiv:2410.13473.
- K. Mehlhorn, Data Structures and Algorithms 1: Sorting and Searching (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013), Vol. 1.
- M. L. Fredman, J. Komlós, and E. Szemerédi, Storing a sparse table with 0 (1) worst case access time, J. ACM 31, 538 (1984).
- M. L. Fredman and J. Komlós, On the size of separating systems and families of perfect hash functions, SIAM J. Algebr. Discrete Methods 5, 61 (1984).
- N. Alon, Explicit construction of exponential sized families of k-independent sets, Discrete Math. 58, 191 (1986).
- J. Korner and K. Marton, New bounds for perfect hashing via information theory, Eur. J. Comb. 9, 523 (1988).
- J. P. Schmidt and A. Siegel, The spatial complexity of oblivious k-probe hash functions, SIAM J. Comput. 19, 775 (1990).
- N. Alon, R. Yuster, and U. Zwick, Color-coding, J. ACM 42, 844 (1995).
- M. Naor, L. J. Schulman, and A. Srinivasan, in Proceedings of IEEE 36th Annual Foundations of Computer Science (IEEE, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1995), pp. 182–191.
- M. Atici, S. Magliveras, D. Stinson, and W.-D. Wei, Some recursive constructions for perfect hash families, J. Comb. Des. 4, 353 (1996).
- Z. J. Czech, G. Havas, and B. S. Majewski, Perfect hashing, Theor. Comput. Sci. 182, 1 (1997).
- S. R. Blackburn and P. R. Wild, Optimal linear perfect hash families, J. Comb. Theory Ser. A 83, 233 (1998).
- S. R. Blackburn, Perfect hash families: Probabilistic methods and explicit constructions, J. Comb. Theory Ser. A 92, 54 (2000).
- D. R. Stinson, R. Wei, and L. Zhu, New constructions for perfect hash families and related structures using combinatorial designs and codes, J. Comb. Des. 8, 189 (2000).
- N. Alon and S. Gutner, Balanced families of perfect hash functions and their applications, ACM Trans. Algorithm. 6, 1 (2010).
- M. M. Wilde, Quantum Information Theory (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013).
- J. Watrous, The Theory of Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018).
- D. Greenbaum, Introduction to quantum gate set tomography, arXiv:1509.02921.
- IBM Quantum Platform https://quantum-computing.ibm.com/.
- G. Li, Y. Ding, and Y. Xie, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ACM, Providence, RI, USA, 2019), pp. 1001–1014.