Certification of quantum state functions under partial information
1ICFO - Institut de Ciencies Fotoniques, The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, 08860 Castelldefels, Barcelona, Spain
2Physics Department E. Pancini - Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Complesso Universitario Monte S. Angelo - Via Cintia - I-80126 Napoli, Italy
3ICREA - Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, 08010 Barcelona, Spain
| Published: | 2024-08-16, volume 8, page 1442 |
| Eprint: | arXiv:2311.06094v2 |
| Doi: | https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2024-08-16-1442 |
| Citation: | Quantum 8, 1442 (2024). |
Find this paper interesting or want to discuss? Scite or leave a comment on SciRate.
Abstract
Convex functions of quantum states play a key role in quantum physics, with examples ranging from Bell inequalities to von Neumann entropy. However, in experimental scenarios, direct measurements of these functions are often impractical. We address this issue by introducing two methods for determining rigorous confidence bounds for convex functions based on informationally incomplete measurements. Our approach outperforms existing protocols by providing tighter bounds for a fixed confidence level and number of measurements. We evaluate the performance of our methods using both numerical and experimental data. Our findings demonstrate the efficacy of our approach, paving the way for improved quantum state certification in real-world applications.
► BibTeX data
► References
[1] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum computation and quantum information (Cambridge university press, 2010).
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976667
[2] D. F. V. James, P. G. Kwiat, W. J. Munro and A. G. White, Measurement of qubits, Phys. Rev. A 64, 052312 (2001).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.64.052312
[3] R. T. Thew, K. Nemoto, A. G. White and W. J. Munro, Qudit quantum-state tomography, Phys. Rev. A 66, 012303 (2002).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.66.012303
[4] D. Gross, Y.-K. Liu, S. T. Flammia, S. Becker and J. Eisert, Quantum State Tomography via Compressed Sensing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 150401 (2010).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.150401
[5] M. Christandl and R. Renner, Reliable Quantum State Tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 120403 (2012).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.120403
[6] J. Wang, V. B. Scholz and R. Renner, Confidence Polytopes in Quantum State Tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 190401 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.190401
[7] M. Guţă, J. Kahn, R. Kueng and J. A. Tropp, Fast state tomography with optimal error bounds, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53, 204001 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab8111
[8] K. T. Goh, C. Perumangatt, Z. X. Lee, A. Ling and V. Scarani, Experimental comparison of tomography and self-testing in certifying entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 100, 022305 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.100.022305
[9] J. Eisert et al., Quantum certification and benchmarking, Nature Reviews Physics 2, 382 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-020-0186-4
[10] J. O. de Almeida, M. Kleinmann and G. Sentís, Comparison of confidence regions for quantum state tomography, New Journal of Physics 25, 113018 (2023).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/ad06d9
[11] J. Steinberg, H. C. Nguyen and M. Kleinmann, Certifying activation of quantum correlations with finite data (2023), arXiv:2305.03748.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.03748
arXiv:2305.03748
[12] D. O. Norkin, E. O. Kiktenko and A. K. Fedorov, Reliable confidence regions for quantum tomography using distribution moments, Phys. Rev. A 109, 032414 (2024).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.109.032414
[13] C. de Gois and M. Kleinmann, User-friendly confidence regions for quantum state tomography, Phys. Rev. A 109, 062417 (2024).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.109.062417
[14] J. Watrous, Lecture Notes on Quantum Information Theory (2021).
https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/~watrous/QIT-notes/
[15] P. Skrzypczyk and D. Cavalcanti, Semidefinite Programming in Quantum Information Science, 2053-2563 (IOP Publishing, 2023).
https://doi.org/10.1088/978-0-7503-3343-6
[16] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization (Cambridge University Press, 2004).
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804441
[17] V. Mnih, C. Szepesvári and J.-Y. Audibert, Empirical Bernstein Stopping, in Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML '08 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2008) p. 672–679.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1390156.1390241
[18] A. Maurer and M. Pontil, Empirical Bernstein Bounds and Sample Variance Penalization (2009), arXiv:0907.3740.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0907.3740
arXiv:0907.3740
[19] J. Cotler and F. Wilczek, Quantum Overlapping Tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 100401 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.100401
[20] J. Bretagnolle and C. Huber, Lois empiriques et distance de Prokhorov, Séminaire de probabilités de Strasbourg 12, 332 (1978).
http://www.numdam.org/item/SPS_1978__12__332_0/
[21] F. B. Maciejewski, Z. Puchała and M. Oszmaniec, Operational Quantum Average-Case Distances, Quantum 7, 1106 (2023).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-09-11-1106
[22] H.-Y. Huang, R. Kueng and J. Preskill, Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measurements, Nature Physics 16, 1050 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-0932-7
[23] S. T. Flammia and Y.-K. Liu, Direct Fidelity Estimation from Few Pauli Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 230501 (2011).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.230501
[24] G. Müller-Rigat et al., Certifying the quantum Fisher information from a given set of mean values: a semidefinite programming approach, Quantum 7, 1152 (2023).
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-10-24-1152
[25] A. Kalev, R. L. Kosut and I. H. Deutsch, Quantum tomography protocols with positivity are compressed sensing protocols, npj Quantum Information 1, 1 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1038/npjqi.2015.18
[26] S. Boucheron, G. Lugosi and P. Massart, Concentration inequalities: A nonasymptotic theory of independence (Oxford university press, 2013).
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199535255.001.0001
Cited by
[1] Shantanav Chakraborty, Siddhartha Das, Arnab Ghorui, Soumyabrata Hazra, and Uttam Singh, "Sample complexity of black box work extraction", Quantum Science and Technology 10 4, 045070 (2025).
[2] Danilo Zia, Luca Innocenti, Giorgio Minati, Salvatore Lorenzo, Alessia Suprano, Rosario Di Bartolo, Nicolò Spagnolo, Taira Giordani, Valeria Cimini, G. Massimo Palma, Alessandro Ferraro, Fabio Sciarrino, and Mauro Paternostro, "Quantum reservoir computing for photonic entanglement witnessing", Science Advances 11 50, eady7987 (2025).
[3] Leonardo Zambrano, Teodor Parella-Dilmé, Antonio Acín, and Donato Farina, "Certification of quantum properties with imperfect measurements", Quantum Science and Technology 11 3, 035011 (2026).
[4] Zherui Jerry Wang, David Dechant, Yash J. Patel, and Jordi Tura, "Mitigating shot noise in local overlapping quantum tomography with semidefinite programming", Physical Review A 111 5, 052444 (2025).
[5] Adriano Macarone-Palmieri, Leonardo Zambrano, Maciej Lewenstein, Antonio Acín, and Donato Farina, "Deep neural network-assisted improvement of quantum compressed sensing tomography", Physica Scripta 100 11, 115106 (2025).
[6] Dongdong Zhang, "Stable Qubit Readout and the Identifiability of Population Change", arXiv:2606.30462, (2026).
The above citations are from Crossref's cited-by service (last updated successfully 2026-08-10 20:19:53) and SAO/NASA ADS (last updated successfully 2026-08-10 20:19:54). 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.