Reversing quantum dynamics with near-optimal quantum and classical fidelity

By Howard Barnum, Emanuel Knill. 2000

319 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We consider the problem of reversing quantum dynamics, with the goal of preserving an initial state’s quantum entanglement or classical correlation with a reference system. We exhibit an approximate reversal operation, adapted to the initial density operator and the “noise” dynamics to be reversed. We show that its error in preserving either quantum or classical information is no more than twice that of the optimal reversal operation. Applications to quantum algorithms and information transmission are discussed.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ea988c82a94eb3790ea209c81dd3bd468b47dac9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

1. S. Shenker
2. D. Huse
3. D. Stanford
4. Michael J. Gullans
5. Stephen M. Barnett
6. Nengkun Yu
7. Zhenbin Yang
8. Jeongwan Haah

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

1. D. Stanford
2. S. Shenker
3. Zhenbin Yang
4. D. Huse
5. A. Nahum
6. Michael J. Gullans
7. Geoff Penington
8. V. Khemani

Citations in the corpus

• Dynamical Purification Phase Transition Induced by Quantum Measurements (2019, background): “VIII, the existence of this recovery operation implies that there is also an explicit recovery operation expressed in terms of ρm and N u t,ta with similar fidelities [47].”
• Sample-Optimal Tomography of Quantum States (2015, methodology): “In each case, we analyze the measurements directly, without making use of the results of [36] and [37] or other prior work.”
• Replica wormholes and the black hole interior (2019, background): “However, it still achieves very good performance, with an “average error” at most twice the optimal average error (using any recovery channel) [64].”
• Quantum state discrimination (2008, background): “In t he general case, for which explicit results are not known, it is possible to deduc e both upper [46,47], and lower [48, 49] bounds on the error probability.”