Finish quantum circuits subsection

This commit is contained in:
2026-04-22 22:48:08 +02:00
parent 47c725e1fa
commit 513eb7579f
2 changed files with 57 additions and 35 deletions

View File

@@ -643,6 +643,8 @@ output \cite[Sec.~3.2.2]{griffiths_introduction_1995}.
Operators are useful to describe the relations between different Operators are useful to describe the relations between different
quantities relating to a particle. quantities relating to a particle.
An example of this is the differential operator $\partial x$. An example of this is the differential operator $\partial x$.
Two operators $P_1$ and $P_2$ are said to \emph{commute}, if $P_1P_2
= P_2P_1$ and \emph{anti-commute} if $P_1P_2 = -P_2P_1$.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Observables} \subsection{Observables}
@@ -871,7 +873,7 @@ Take for example the two qubits
\end{align*} \end{align*}
% TODO: Fix the fact that \psi is used above for the single-qubit % TODO: Fix the fact that \psi is used above for the single-qubit
% case and below for the multi-qubit case % case and below for the multi-qubit case
We examine the state $\ket{\psi}$ of the composite system as. We examine the state $\ket{\psi}$ of the composite system.
Assuming the qubits are independent, this is a \emph{product state} Assuming the qubits are independent, this is a \emph{product state}
$\ket{\psi} = \ket{\psi_1}\otimes\ket{\psi_2}$. $\ket{\psi} = \ket{\psi_1}\otimes\ket{\psi_2}$.
When not ambiguous, we may omit the tensor product symbol or even write When not ambiguous, we may omit the tensor product symbol or even write
@@ -933,7 +935,7 @@ After examining the modelling of single- and multi-qubit systems,
we now shift our focus to describing the evolution of their states. we now shift our focus to describing the evolution of their states.
We model state changes as operators. We model state changes as operators.
Unlike classical systems, where there are only two possible states and Unlike classical systems, where there are only two possible states and
thus the only possible state change is a bit-flip, a gerenal qubit thus the only possible state change is a bit-flip, a general qubit
state as shown in \autoref{eq:gen_qubit_state} lives on a continuum of values. state as shown in \autoref{eq:gen_qubit_state} lives on a continuum of values.
We thus technically also have an infinite number of possible state changes. We thus technically also have an infinite number of possible state changes.
Luckily, we can express any operator as a linear combination of the Luckily, we can express any operator as a linear combination of the
@@ -970,10 +972,15 @@ Luckily, we can express any operator as a linear combination of the
\end{align*} \end{align*}
$I$ is the identity operator and $X$ and $Z$ are referred to as $I$ is the identity operator and $X$ and $Z$ are referred to as
\emph{bit-flips} and \emph{phase-flips} respectively. \emph{bit-flips} and \emph{phase-flips} respectively.
We also call these operators \emph{gates}. In fact, if we allow for complex coefficients, the $X$ and $Z$
operators are sufficient to express any other operator as a linear
combination \cite[Sec.~2.2]{roffe_quantum_2019}.
In the context of modifying qubit states, we also call operators \emph{gates}.
When working with multi-qubit systems, we can also apply Pauli gates When working with multi-qubit systems, we can also apply Pauli gates
to individual qubits independently, e.g., $I_1 X_2 I_3 Z_4 Y_5$. to individual qubits independently, which we write ask e.g., $I_1 X_2
We often omit the identity operators, instead writing $X_2 Z_4 Y_5$. I_3 Z_4 Y_5$.
We often omit the identity operators, instead writing, e.g., $X_2 Z_4 Y_5$.
Other important operators include the \emph{Hadamard} and Other important operators include the \emph{Hadamard} and
\emph{controlled-NOT (CNOT)} gates \cite[Sec.~1.3]{nielsen_quantum_2010} \emph{controlled-NOT (CNOT)} gates \cite[Sec.~1.3]{nielsen_quantum_2010}
\vspace*{-7mm} \vspace*{-7mm}
@@ -1010,20 +1017,51 @@ Other important operators include the \emph{Hadamard} and
\noindent Many more operators relevant to quantum computing exist, but they are \noindent Many more operators relevant to quantum computing exist, but they are
not covered here as they are not central to this work. not covered here as they are not central to this work.
\indent\red{[We only need to consider X and Z errors]
\cite[Equation~8]{roffe_quantum_2019}} \\
\indent\red{[Explain commuting/anticommuting property of operators]
[Journal~p.~46]}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Quantum Circuits} \subsection{Quantum Circuits}
\label{Quantum Circuits} \label{Quantum Circuits}
\noindent\indent\red{[Controlled operations] % Intro
\cite[Sec.~4.3]{nielsen_quantum_2010}} \\
\indent\red{[In case this reference is needed: Measurements Using these quantum gates, we can construct \emph{circuits} to manipulate
\cite[Sec.~4.4]{nielsen_quantum_2010}]} \\ the states of qubits \cite[Sec.~1.3.4]{nielsen_quantum_2010}.
\indent\red{[General circuit stuff] \cite[Sec.~1.3.4]{nielsen_quantum_2010}} Circuits are read from left to right and each horizontal wire
represents a qubit whose state evolves as it passes through
successive gates.
% General notation
A single line carries a quantum state, while a double line
denotes a classical bit, typically used to carry the result of a measurement.
A measurement is represented by a meter symbol.
In general, gates are represented as labeled boxes placed on one or more wires.
An exception is the CNOT gate, where the operation is represented as
the symbol $\oplus$.
% Controlled gates & example
We can additionally add a control input to a gate.
This conditions its application on the state of another qubit
\cite[Sec.~4.3]{nielsen_quantum_2010}.
The control connection is represented by a vertical line connecting
the gate to the corresponding qubit, where a filled dot is placed.
A controlled gate applies the respective operation only if the
control qubit is in state $\ket{1}$.
An example of this is the CNOT gate introduced in
\autoref{subsec:Qubits and Multi-Qubit States}, which is depicted in
\autoref{fig:cnot_circuit}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{quantikz}
\lstick{$\ket{\psi}_1$} & \ctrl{1} & \\
\lstick{$\ket{\psi}_2$} & \targ{} & \\
\end{quantikz}
\caption{CNOT gate circuit.}
\label{fig:cnot_circuit}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Quantum Error Correction} \section{Quantum Error Correction}
@@ -1261,8 +1299,10 @@ Formally, we define the \emph{stabilizer group} $\mathcal{S}$ as
\mathcal{S} = \left\{P_i \in \mathcal{G}_n ~:~ P_i \ket{\psi}_\text{L} = \mathcal{S} = \left\{P_i \in \mathcal{G}_n ~:~ P_i \ket{\psi}_\text{L} =
(+1)\ket{\psi}_\text{L} \forall \ket{\psi}_\text{L} ~\cap~ (+1)\ket{\psi}_\text{L} \forall \ket{\psi}_\text{L} ~\cap~
[P_i,P_j] = 0 \forall i,j\right\} [P_i,P_j] = 0 \forall i,j\right\}
.% ,%
\end{align*} \end{align*}
where $[P_i,P_j] := P_iP_j - P_j P_i$ is called the \emph{commutator}
of $P_i$ and $P_j$.
We care in particular about the commuting properties of stabilizers We care in particular about the commuting properties of stabilizers
with respect to possible errors. with respect to possible errors.
The measurement circuit for an arbitrary stabilizer $P_i$ modifies The measurement circuit for an arbitrary stabilizer $P_i$ modifies
@@ -1388,25 +1428,8 @@ $Z$ operators and some with only $X$ operators.
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
\textbf{Content:} \textbf{Content:}
\begin{itemize} \begin{itemize}
\item General context
\begin{itemize}
\item Why we need QEC (correcting errors due
to noisy gates)
\item Main challenges of QEC compared to classical
error correction
\item Logical vs physical states, logical vs
physical operators
\end{itemize}
\item Stabilizer codes \item Stabilizer codes
\begin{itemize} \begin{itemize}
\item Definition of a stabilizer code
\item The stabilizer its generators (note somewhere
that the generators have to commute
to be able to
be measured without disturbing each other)
(Why we need commutativity of the
stabilizers [Journal,
p.~51], [Got97, p.~6])
\item syndrome extraction circuit \item syndrome extraction circuit
\item Stabilizer codes are effectively the QM \item Stabilizer codes are effectively the QM
% TODO: Actually binary linear codes or % TODO: Actually binary linear codes or
@@ -1418,8 +1441,6 @@ $Z$ operators and some with only $X$ operators.
rather than working with the states directly rather than working with the states directly
\cite[Sec.~10.5.1]{nielsen_quantum_2010} \cite[Sec.~10.5.1]{nielsen_quantum_2010}
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}
\item Digitization of errors
\item CSS codes
\item Color codes? \item Color codes?
\item Surface codes? \item Surface codes?
\end{itemize} \end{itemize}

View File

@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
% sorting=nty, % sorting=nty,
% ]{biblatex} % ]{biblatex}
\usepackage{todonotes} \usepackage{todonotes}
\usepackage{quantikz}
\usetikzlibrary{calc, positioning, arrows, fit} \usetikzlibrary{calc, positioning, arrows, fit}