Efficient tomography of a quantum many-body system
read more
Citations
Machine learning and the physical sciences
Neural-network quantum state tomography
Many-body quantum state tomography with neural networks
Self-verifying variational quantum simulation of lattice models
Probing Rényi entanglement entropy via randomized measurements.
References
Quantum Computation and Quantum Information
The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states
The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states
The Finite Group Velocity of Quantum Spin Systems
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (13)
Q2. How many measurements can be made with MPS tomography?
MPS tomography is efficient if it achieves a constant estimation error with a total number of measurements which scales polynomially with N.
Q3. How can the authors calculate the ideal time-evolved states?
The ideal time-evolved states can easily be calculated by brute force matrix exponentiation for 8 spins, e.g. |φ(t)〉 = exp(−iHIsingt/~) |φ(0)〉.
Q4. How can the authors measure spin in a single-spin basis?
The authors can measure any individual spin in any single-spin basis by first implementing laser-driven spin rotations that map the eigenstates of the desired single-spin-operators onto the eigenstates of the Pauli σz operator, then carrying out electron shelving as before.
Q5. What is the simplest way to compute the local reduced density matrices?
The authors compute the local reduced density matrices ρs of |ψest〉 on spins s, s + 1, . . . , s + k − 1. Candi-date Hamiltonians are given by Hτ = ∑N−k+1s=1 11,...,s−1 ⊗ hs ⊗ 1s+k,...,N where hs = Pker(Tτ(ρs)) is the orthogonal projection onto the kernel of the linear operator Tτ(ρs) and Tτ replaces eigenvalues of ρs smaller than or equal to τ by zero.
Q6. How long does it take to convert the input data into local expectations?
with their implementation it takes only a short time to convert the input data into linearly many local expectation values.
Q7. What is the estimation error of a constant number of measurements?
This means that an (at most) constant estimation error can be achieved with a total number of measurements given by MT = cN2(N − k + 1)3k which is only cubic in N.
Q8. What is the way to calculate the full N-spin time evolved ideal states?
to calculate the full N-spin time evolved ideal states, and compare them with the MPS estimates, the authors use the library function scipy.sparse.linalg.expm_multiply [32].
Q9. What is the maximum velocity of the entanglement in the truncated system?
The largest of these gradients corresponds to the maximum velocity vmax at which energy and correlations disperse in the truncated system.
Q10. How is the time required by MPS tomography?
As a consequence, the authors observe that the time required by MPS tomography increases roughly with ≈ N1.2; in any case, post-processing time increases at most cubically with N. Hence, MPS tomography is efficient.
Q11. What is the covariance of the local outcome probabilities?
If two local outcome probabilities have been estimated from measurements in the same basis, their covariance is estimated from the measurement outcomes with a simple outcome counting scheme; otherwise, their covariance is equal to zero.
Q12. How do the authors measure the fidelity of the Pauli string operators?
The authors draw M randomindices (k1, k2, ...kM) with ki ∈ {1, 2, ..., 4N} according to the distribution qk and approximate the fidelity with F ≈ F = 1M ∑M i=1 ρ ki lab σki .
Q13. How many measurements bases do the authors need to measure the blocks of k neighbouring spins?
Rather than measuring the N − k + 1 blocks separately, the authors implement a straightforward scheme to measure them at the same time, requiring a total of 3k measurements bases for the entire string (see Supplementary Material Sec. III).