Skip to main content
QUICK REVIEW

[论文解读] An alternative approach to optimal wire cutting without ancilla qubits

Edwin Pednault|arXiv (Cornell University)|Mar 15, 2023
Optimal Experimental Design Methods被引用 5
一句话总结

本文提出了一种新型的量子线路布线切割方法,可在不额外使用辅助量子比特的情况下,实现与辅助量子比特方法相当的最优乘法因子,从而最小化电路执行成本。通过使用酉 2-设计并构建更小的非 2-设计替代方案,该方法实现了在近期含噪声中等规模量子(NISQ)设备上高效、可扩展的子线路执行,且统计开销极低。

ABSTRACT

Wire cutting is a technique for partitioning large quantum circuits into smaller subcircuits in such a way that observables for the original circuits can be estimated from measurements on the smaller subcircuits. Such techniques provide workarounds for the limited numbers of qubits that are available on near-term quantum devices. Wire cutting, however, introduces multiplicative factors in the number of times such subcircuits need to be executed in order to estimate desired quantum observables to desired levels of statistical accuracy. An optimal wire-cutting methodology has recently been reported that uses ancilla qubits to minimize the multiplicative factors involved as a function of the number of wire cuts. Until just recently, the best-known wire-cutting technique that did not employ ancillas asymptotically converged to the same multiplicative factors, but performed significantly worse for small numbers of cuts. This latter technique also requires inserting measurement and state-preparation subcircuits that are randomly sampled from Clifford 2-designs on a per-shot basis. This paper presents a modified wire-cutting approach for pairs of subcircuits that achieves the same optimal multiplicative factors as wire cutting aided by ancilla qubits, but without requiring ancillas. The paper also shows that, while unitary 2-designs provide a sufficient basis for satisfying the decomposition, 2-designs are not mathematically necessary and alternative unitary designs can be constructed for the decompositions that are substantially smaller in size than 2-designs. As this paper was just about to be released, a similar result was published, so we also include a comparison of the two approaches.

研究动机与目标

  • 解决在量子比特数量有限的近期设备上执行大规模量子线路的挑战。
  • 在保持电路执行成本最小乘法因子的前提下,消除最优布线切割协议中对辅助量子比特的需求。
  • 构建更小的非 2-设计酉构造,同时满足布线切割分解的数学要求。
  • 为现有无需辅助量子比特的布线切割方法提供一种实用替代方案,以解决其在小数量切割时开销过高的问题。

提出的方法

  • 提出一种针对子线路对的改进布线切割框架,用基于酉设计的方法替代原有的基于辅助量子比特的分解方式。
  • 采用恒等通道的线性分解形式,即 $ \text{id}(\rho) = \sum_{j=1}^{T} c_j \rho^j \text{Tr}(O^j \rho) $,以实现对子线路测量结果的后处理。
  • 证明 2-设计对分解是充分但非必要的,从而可构造更小的等价酉设计。
  • 构建了显著小于完整 2-设计的替代酉设计,同时保持布线切割的正确性。
  • 通过从这些紧凑设计中随机采样酉操作来实现该方法,避免了子线路之间的经典通信。
  • 将所提方法与一项同期工作进行比较,表明其在性能上等价,且在设计规模上更具优势。

实验结果

研究问题

  • RQ1能否在不使用辅助量子比特的情况下,实现与辅助量子比特方法相当的最优布线切割性能?
  • RQ2布线切割分解是否必须依赖 2-设计,还是更小的酉设计即可满足要求?
  • RQ3对于给定的电路,能够实现正确布线切割分解的最小酉设计大小是多少?
  • RQ4所提无辅助量子比特方法在小数量切割时,与以往非辅助方法相比性能如何?
  • RQ5该方法能否在近期量子硬件上高效实现,且其量子比特数量有限?

主要发现

  • 所提方法在电路执行成本的乘法因子上与辅助量子比特布线切割方法保持一致,从而无需额外量子比特。
  • 在小数量切割时,该方法优于以往的无辅助量子比特方法,后者在该场景下因高开销而表现不佳。
  • 酉 2-设计对布线切割分解是充分但非必要的,从而可构造更小的等价设计。
  • 本文构建了显著小于 2-设计的替代酉设计,同时保持分解的正确性。
  • 该方法在性能上与一项同期工作相当,具有相似的统计效率,但设计规模更小。
  • 该方法通过最小化量子比特开销和电路执行成本,实现了在 NISQ 设备上高效、可扩展的布线切割。

更好的研究,从现在开始

从阅读论文到最终审阅,大幅缩短您的研究时间。

无需绑定信用卡

本解读由 AI 生成,并经人工编辑审核。