Operational, gauge-free quantum tomography

Olivia Di Matteo; John Gamble; Chris Granade; Kenneth Rudinger; Nathan Wiebe

doi:10.22331/q-2020-11-17-364

Operational, gauge-free quantum tomography

Olivia Di Matteo^1,2,3, John Gamble⁴, Chris Granade⁴, Kenneth Rudinger⁵, and Nathan Wiebe^4,6,7

¹TRIUMF, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T2A3
²Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
³Institute for Quantum Computing, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
⁴Microsoft Research, Quantum Architectures and Computation Group, Redmond, Washington 98052, USA
⁵Quantum Performance Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, USA
⁶Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
⁷Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, USA

Published:	2020-11-17, volume 4, page 364
Eprint:	arXiv:2007.01470v2
Doi:	https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2020-11-17-364
Citation:	Quantum 4, 364 (2020).

Find this paper interesting or want to discuss? Scite or leave a comment on SciRate.

Abstract

As increasingly impressive quantum information processors are realized in laboratories around the world, robust and reliable characterization of these devices is now more urgent than ever. These diagnostics can take many forms, but one of the most popular categories is $\textit{tomography}$, where an underlying parameterized model is proposed for a device and inferred by experiments. Here, we introduce and implement efficient operational tomography, which uses experimental observables as these model parameters. This addresses a problem of ambiguity in representation that arises in current tomographic approaches (the $\textit{gauge problem}$). Solving the gauge problem enables us to efficiently implement operational tomography in a Bayesian framework computationally, and hence gives us a natural way to include prior information and discuss uncertainty in fit parameters. We demonstrate this new tomography in a variety of different experimentally-relevant scenarios, including standard process tomography, Ramsey interferometry, randomized benchmarking, and gate set tomography.

► BibTeX data

@article{DiMatteo2020operationalgauge,
  doi = {10.22331/q-2020-11-17-364},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2020-11-17-364},
  title = {Operational, gauge-free quantum tomography},
  author = {Di Matteo, Olivia and Gamble, John and Granade, Chris and Rudinger, Kenneth and Wiebe, Nathan},
  journal = {{Quantum}},
  issn = {2521-327X},
  publisher = {{Verein zur F{\"{o}}rderung des Open Access Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften}},
  volume = {4},
  pages = {364},
  month = nov,
  year = {2020}
}

► References

[1] M. Reiher, N. Wiebe, K. M. Svore, D. Wecker, and M. Troyer, ``Elucidating reaction mechanisms on quantum computers,'' Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 201619152 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1619152114

[2] C. Ferrie, ``Self-Guided Quantum Tomography,'' Physical Review Letters 113, 190404 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.190404

[3] J. B. Altepeter, D. Branning, E. Jeffrey, T. C. Wei, P. G. Kwiat, R. T. Thew, J. L. O'Brien, M. A. Nielsen, and A. G. White, ``Ancilla-assisted quantum process tomography,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 193601 (2003a).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.193601

[4] C. Granade, J. Combes, and D. G. Cory, ``Practical Bayesian tomography,'' New Journal of Physics 18, 033024 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/18/3/033024

[5] R. Blume-Kohout, ``Optimal, reliable estimation of quantum states,'' New J. Phys. 12, 043034 (2010).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/12/4/043034

[6] F. Huszár and N. M. T. Houlsby, ``Adaptive Bayesian quantum tomography,'' Physical Review A 85, 052120 (2012).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.85.052120

[7] D. C. McKay, A. W. Cross, C. J. Wood, and J. M. Gambetta, ``Correlated randomized benchmarking,'' (2020), arXiv:2003.02354 [quant-ph].
arXiv:2003.02354

[8] M. Quadeer, M. Tomamichel, and C. Ferrie, ``Minimax quantum state estimation under bregman divergence,'' Quantum 3, 126 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-03-04-126

[9] P. Cerfontaine, R. Otten, and H. Bluhm, ``Self-consistent calibration of quantum gate sets,'' (2019), arXiv:1906.00950 [quant-ph] https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.13.044071.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.13.044071
arXiv:1906.00950

[10] T. Guff, Y. R. Sanders, N. A. McMahon, and A. Gilchrist, ``Decision-making in quantum state discrimination,'' (2019), arXiv:1906.09737 [quant-ph].
arXiv:1906.09737

[11] L. J. Fiderer, J. Schuff, and D. Braun, ``Neural-network heuristics for adaptive bayesian quantum estimation,'' (2020), arXiv:2003.02183 [quant-ph].
arXiv:2003.02183

[12] J. M. Lukens, K. J. Law, A. Jasra, and P. Lougovski, ``A practical and efficient approach for bayesian quantum state estimation,'' (2020), arXiv:2002.10354 [quant-ph] https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/ab8efa.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/ab8efa
arXiv:2002.10354

[13] J. B. Altepeter, D. Branning, E. Jeffrey, T. C. Wei, P. G. Kwiat, R. T. Thew, J. L. O'Brien, M. A. Nielsen, and A. G. White, ``Ancilla-assisted quantum process tomography,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 193601 (2003b).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.193601

[14] 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,'' Physical Review A 87, 062119 (2013).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.87.062119

[15] R. Blume-Kohout, J. K. Gamble, E. Nielsen, J. Mizrahi, J. D. Sterk, and P. Maunz, ``Robust, self-consistent, closed-form tomography of quantum logic gates on a trapped ion qubit,'' (2013), arXiv:1310.4492 [quant-ph].
arXiv:1310.4492

[16] J. P. Dehollain, J. T. Muhonen, R. Blume-Kohout, K. M. Rudinger, J. K. Gamble, E. Nielsen, A. Laucht, S. Simmons, R. Kalra, A. S. Dzurak, et al., ``Optimization of a solid-state electron spin qubit using gate set tomography,'' New Journal of Physics 18, 103018 (2016).

[17] R. Blume-Kohout, J. K. Gamble, E. Nielsen, K. Rudinger, J. Mizrahi, K. Fortier, and P. Maunz, ``Demonstration of qubit operations below a rigorous fault tolerance threshold with gate set tomography,'' Nature Communications 8, 14485 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14485

[18] K. Rudinger, S. Kimmel, D. Lobser, and P. Maunz, ``Experimental demonstration of a cheap and accurate phase estimation,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 190502 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.190502

[19] K. Rudinger, T. Proctor, D. Langharst, M. Sarovar, K. Young, and R. Blume-Kohout, ``Probing context-dependent errors in quantum processors,'' Physical Review X 9, 021045 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.9.021045

[20] M. Rol, C. Bultink, T. O’Brien, S. De Jong, L. Theis, X. Fu, F. Luthi, R. Vermeulen, J. de Sterke, A. Bruno, et al., ``Restless tuneup of high-fidelity qubit gates,'' Physical Review Applied 7, 041001 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.7.041001

[21] Y. Chen, M. Farahzad, S. Yoo, and T.-C. Wei, ``Detector tomography on IBM quantum computers and mitigation of an imperfect measurement,'' Physical Review A 100, 052315 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.100.052315

[22] M. R. Geller, ``Rigorous measurement error correction,'' (2020), arXiv:2002.01471 https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ab9591 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ab9591
arXiv:2002.01471

[23] L. Govia, G. Ribeill, D. Ristè, M. Ware, and H. Krovi, ``Bootstrapping quantum process tomography via a perturbative ansatz,'' Nature communications 11, 1 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14873-1

[24] S. S. Hong, A. T. Papageorge, P. Sivarajah, G. Crossman, N. Didier, A. M. Polloreno, E. A. Sete, S. W. Turkowski, M. P. da Silva, and B. R. Johnson, ``Demonstration of a parametrically activated entangling gate protected from flux noise,'' Physical Review A 101, 012302 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.101.012302

[25] A. Hughes, V. Schäfer, K. Thirumalai, D. Nadlinger, S. Woodrow, D. Lucas, and C. Ballance, ``Benchmarking of a high-fidelity mixed-species entangling gate,'' (2020), arXiv:2004.08162 [quant-ph] https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.080504.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.080504
arXiv:2004.08162

[26] M. K. Joshi, A. Elben, B. Vermersch, T. Brydges, C. Maier, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, ``Quantum information scrambling in a trapped-ion quantum simulator with tunable range interactions,'' (2020), arXiv:2001.02176 [quant-ph] https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.240505.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.240505
arXiv:2001.02176

[27] S. Mavadia, C. Edmunds, C. Hempel, H. Ball, F. Roy, T. Stace, and M. Biercuk, ``Experimental quantum verification in the presence of temporally correlated noise,'' NPJ Quantum Information 4, 1 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-017-0052-0

[28] M. Ware, G. Ribeill, D. Riste, C. Ryan, B. Johnson, and M. P. da Silva, ``Experimental pauli-frame randomization on a superconducting qubit,'' Bulletin of the American Physical Society 62 (2017).
arXiv:1803.01818v2

[29] E. Nielsen, R. J. Blume-Kohout, K. M. Rudinger, T. J. Proctor, L. Saldyt, et al., Python GST Implementation (PyGSTi) v. 0.9, Tech. Rep. (Sandia National Lab.(SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States), 2019).
https://doi.org/10.11578/dc.20190722.2

[30] E. Nielsen, K. Rudinger, T. Proctor, A. Russo, K. Young, and R. Blume-Kohout, ``Probing quantum processor performance with pyGSTi,'' (2020), arXiv:2002.12476 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ab8aa4
arXiv:2002.12476

[31] Ł. Rudnicki, Z. Puchała, and K. Zyczkowski, ``Gauge invariant information concerning quantum channels,'' Quantum 2, 60 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2018-04-11-60

[32] J. Lin, J. J. Wallman, and R. Laflamme, ``Independent state and measurement characterization in quantum computers,'' (2019), arXiv:1910.07511 [quant-ph].
arXiv:1910.07511

[33] A. Doucet and A. M. Johansen, A Tutorial on Particle Filtering and Smoothing: Fifteen Years Later (2011).

[34] W. K. Hastings, ``Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications,'' Biometrika 57, 97 (1970).
https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/57.1.97

[35] M. Betancourt, ``A Conceptual Introduction to Hamiltonian Monte Carlo,'' (2017), arXiv:1701.02434 [stat].
arXiv:1701.02434

[36] M. D. Hoffman and A. Gelman, ``The No-U-Turn Sampler: Adaptively Setting Path Lengths in Hamiltonian Monte Carlo,'' (2011), arXiv:1111.4246 [cs, stat].
arXiv:1111.4246

[37] I. Hincks, J. J. Wallman, C. Ferrie, C. Granade, and D. G. Cory, ``Bayesian Inference for Randomized Benchmarking Protocols,'' (2018), arXiv:1802.00401 [quant-ph].
arXiv:1802.00401

[38] A. L. Barker, D. E. Brown, and W. N. Martin, ``Bayesian estimation and the Kalman filter,'' Computers & Mathematics with Applications 30, 55 (1995).
https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-1221(95)00156-S

[39] C. Granade, C. Ferrie, I. Hincks, S. Casagrande, T. Alexander, J. Gross, M. Kononenko, and Y. Sanders, ``QInfer: Statistical inference software for quantum applications,'' Quantum 1, 5 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2017-04-25-5

[40] J. Liu and M. West, ``Combined parameter and state estimation in simulation-based filtering,'' in Sequential Monte Carlo Methods in Practice, edited by D. Freitas and N. Gordon (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3437-9_10

[41] M. A. Nielsen and I. Chuang, ``Quantum computation and quantum information,'' (2002).

[42] A. Banerjee, X. Guo, and H. Wang, ``On the optimality of conditional expectation as a Bregman predictor,'' IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 51, 2664 (2005).
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2005.850145

[43] R. Kueng and C. Ferrie, ``Near-optimal quantum tomography: estimators and bounds,'' New Journal of Physics 17, 123013 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/17/12/123013

[44] C. E. Granade, C. Ferrie, N. Wiebe, and D. G. Cory, ``Robust online Hamiltonian learning,'' New Journal of Physics 14, 103013 (2012).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/10/103013

[45] W. Bruzda, V. Cappellini, H.-J. Sommers, and K. Życzkowski, ``Random quantum operations,'' Physics Letters A 373, 320 (2009).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2008.11.043

[46] E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, ``Characterizing quantum gates via randomized benchmarking,'' Physical Review A 85 (2012).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.85.042311

[47] J. Emerson, R. Alicki, and K. Życzkowski, ``Scalable noise estimation with random unitary operators,'' J. Opt. B Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 7, S347 (2005).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1464-4266/7/10/021

[48] J. Emerson, M. Silva, O. Moussa, C. Ryan, M. Laforest, J. Baugh, D. G. Cory, and R. Laflamme, ``Symmetrized characterization of noisy quantum processes,'' Science 317, 1893 (2007).
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1145699

[49] E. Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle, J. Britton, R. Blakestad, J. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, S. Seidelin, and D. Wineland, ``Randomized benchmarking of quantum gates,'' Phys. Rev. A 77, 012307 (2008).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.012307

[50] E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, ``Scalable and robust randomized benchmarking of quantum processes,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 180504 (2011).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.180504

[51] A. Carignan-Dugas, J. J. Wallman, and J. Emerson, ``Characterizing universal gate sets via dihedral benchmarking,'' Phys. Rev. A 92, 060302 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.92.060302

[52] A. W. Cross, E. Magesan, L. S. Bishop, J. A. Smolin, and J. M. Gambetta, ``Scalable randomised benchmarking of non-Clifford gates,'' NPJ Quantum Inf. 2, 16012 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1038/npjqi.2016.12

[53] W. G. Brown and B. Eastin, ``Randomized benchmarking with restricted gate sets,'' Phys. Rev. A 97, 062323 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.97.062323

[54] A. K. Hashagen, S. T. Flammia, D. Gross, and J. J. Wallman, ``Real randomized benchmarking,'' Quantum 2, 85 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2018-08-22-85

[55] J. Helsen, J. J. Wallman, S. T. Flammia, and S. Wehner, ``Multiqubit randomized benchmarking using few samples,'' Phys. Rev. A 100, 032304 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.100.032304

[56] D. C. McKay, S. Sheldon, J. A. Smolin, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, ``Three qubit randomized benchmarking,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 200502 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.200502

[57] J. M. Epstein, A. W. Cross, E. Magesan, and J. M. Gambetta, ``Investigating the limits of randomized benchmarking protocols,'' Phys. Rev. A 89, 062321 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.062321

[58] T. Proctor, K. Rudinger, K. Young, M. Sarovar, and R. Blume-Kohout, ``What randomized benchmarking actually measures,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 130502 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.130502

[59] J. J. Wallman, ``Randomized benchmarking with gate-dependent noise,'' Quantum 2, 47 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2018-01-29-47

[60] T. J. Proctor, A. Carignan-Dugas, K. Rudinger, E. Nielsen, R. Blume-Kohout, and K. Young, ``Direct randomized benchmarking for multiqubit devices,'' Physical Review Letters 123, 030503 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.030503

[61] C. E. Bonferroni, ``Teoria statistica delle classi e calcolo delle probabilità,'' Istituto Superiore di Scienze Economiche e Commerciali di Firenze 8, 3 (1936).

[62] O. J. Dunn, ``Multiple comparisons among means,'' Journal of the American Statistical Association 56, 52 (1961).
https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1961.10482090

[63] J. Kiefer, ``On wald's complete class theorems,'' Ann. Math. Statist. 24, 70 (1953).
https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177729083

[64] V. Al Osipov, H.-J. Sommers, and K. Życzkowski, ``Random bures mixed states and the distribution of their purity,'' Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 43, 055302 (2010).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/43/5/055302

[65] B. H. Fong and S. T. Merkel, ``Randomized Benchmarking, Correlated Noise, and Ising Models,'' (2017), arXiv:1703.09747 [quant-ph].
arXiv:1703.09747

[66] C. Granade, C. Ferrie, and D. G. Cory, ``Accelerated randomized benchmarking,'' New Journal of Physics 17, 013042 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/17/1/013042

[67] R. W. Heeres, P. Reinhold, N. Ofek, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, ``Implementing a universal gate set on a logical qubit encoded in an oscillator,'' Nature Communications 8, 94 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00045-1

[68] D. Steel, ``Bayesian Confirmation Theory and The Likelihood Principle,'' Synthese 156, 53 (2007).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-3492-6

[69] R. Barends, J. Kelly, A. Megrant, A. Veitia, D. Sank, E. Jeffrey, T. C. White, J. Mutus, A. G. Fowler, B. Campbell, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, C. Neill, P. O'Malley, P. Roushan, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, A. N. Korotkov, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Martinis, ``Superconducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance,'' Nature 508, 500 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13171

Cited by

[1] B I Bantysh and Yu I Bogdanov, "Quantum tomography of noisy ion-based qudits", Laser Physics Letters 18 1, 015203 (2021).

[2] A. Stephens, J. M. Cutshall, T. McPhee, and M. Beck, "Self-consistent state and measurement tomography with fewer measurements", Physical Review A 104 1, 012416 (2021).

[3] Simon Martiel, Thomas Ayral, and Cyril Allouche, "Benchmarking Quantum Coprocessors in an Application-Centric, Hardware-Agnostic, and Scalable Way", IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering 2, 1 (2021).

[4] Shahnawaz Ahmed, Fernando Quijandría, and Anton Frisk Kockum, "Gradient-Descent Quantum Process Tomography by Learning Kraus Operators", Physical Review Letters 130 15, 150402 (2023).

[5] T.J. Evans, W. Huang, J. Yoneda, R. Harper, T. Tanttu, K.W. Chan, F.E. Hudson, K.M. Itoh, A. Saraiva, C.H. Yang, A.S. Dzurak, and S.D. Bartlett, "Fast Bayesian Tomography of a Two-Qubit Gate Set in Silicon", Physical Review Applied 17 2, 024068 (2022).

[6] Marco Cattaneo, Matteo A.C. Rossi, Guillermo García-Pérez, Roberta Zambrini, and Sabrina Maniscalco, "Quantum Simulation of Dissipative Collective Effects on Noisy Quantum Computers", PRX Quantum 4 1, 010324 (2023).

[7] Erik Nielsen, Kenneth Rudinger, Timothy Proctor, Kevin Young, and Robin Blume-Kohout, "Efficient flexible characterization of quantum processors with nested error models", New Journal of Physics 23 9, 093020 (2021).

[8] Erik Nielsen, John King Gamble, Kenneth Rudinger, Travis Scholten, Kevin Young, and Robin Blume-Kohout, "Gate Set Tomography", Quantum 5, 557 (2021).

The above citations are from Crossref's cited-by service (last updated successfully 2023-09-30 15:24:13) and SAO/NASA ADS (last updated successfully 2023-09-30 15:24:13). The list may be incomplete as not all publishers provide suitable and complete citation data.

This Paper is published in Quantum under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. Copyright remains with the original copyright holders such as the authors or their institutions.