classical simulation of linear optics subject to
play

Classical simulation of linear optics subject to (nonuniform) losses - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Classical simulation of linear optics subject to (nonuniform) losses Micha l Oszmaniec and Daniel Brod 51st Symposium on Mathematical Physics, Toru n, 16 June 2019 Daniel Brod (UFF Niteroi) Motivation: Quantum Computational Supremacy


  1. Classical simulation of linear optics subject to (nonuniform) losses Micha� l Oszmaniec and Daniel Brod 51st Symposium on Mathematical Physics, Toru´ n, 16 June 2019

  2. Daniel Brod (UFF Niteroi)

  3. Motivation: Quantum Computational Supremacy Building a working quantum computer is hard 1 because of the noise and errors inevitably affecting quantum systems. Error correction and very clean physical qubits are needed. This results in gigantic overheads ( > 1000 ) and a poses great technological challenges. An intermediate step: quantum machines of restricted purpose that (hopefully) can demonstrate quantum computational supremacy 2 . Possible advantage: smaller requirements, no error correction needed . 1 If not impossible: R. Alicki (2013), G. Kalai (2016) 2 A. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Nature 549 , 203-209 (2017)

  4. Motivation: Quantum Computational Supremacy Building a working quantum computer is hard 1 because of the noise and errors inevitably affecting quantum systems. Error correction and very clean physical qubits are needed. This results in gigantic overheads ( > 1000 ) and a poses great technological challenges. An intermediate step: quantum machines of restricted purpose that (hopefully) can demonstrate quantum computational supremacy 2 . Possible advantage: smaller requirements, no error correction needed . 1 If not impossible: R. Alicki (2013), G. Kalai (2016) 2 A. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Nature 549 , 203-209 (2017)

  5. Motivation: Quantum Computational Supremacy Building a working quantum computer is hard 1 because of the noise and errors inevitably affecting quantum systems. Error correction and very clean physical qubits are needed. This results in gigantic overheads ( > 1000 ) and a poses great technological challenges. An intermediate step: quantum machines of restricted purpose that (hopefully) can demonstrate quantum computational supremacy 2 . Possible advantage: smaller requirements, no error correction needed . 1 If not impossible: R. Alicki (2013), G. Kalai (2016) 2 A. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Nature 549 , 203-209 (2017)

  6. Motivation: Quantum Computational Supremacy Building a working quantum computer is hard 1 because of the noise and errors inevitably affecting quantum systems. Error correction and very clean physical qubits are needed. This results in gigantic overheads ( > 1000 ) and a poses great technological challenges. An intermediate step: quantum machines of restricted purpose that (hopefully) can demonstrate quantum computational supremacy 2 . Possible advantage: smaller requirements, no error correction needed . 1 If not impossible: R. Alicki (2013), G. Kalai (2016) 2 A. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Nature 549 , 203-209 (2017)

  7. Motivation: Quantum Computational Supremacy Building a working quantum computer is hard 1 because of the noise and errors inevitably affecting quantum systems. Error correction and very clean physical qubits are needed. This results in gigantic overheads ( > 1000 ) and a poses great technological challenges. An intermediate step: quantum machines of restricted purpose that (hopefully) can demonstrate quantum computational supremacy 2 . Possible advantage: smaller requirements, no error correction needed . 1 If not impossible: R. Alicki (2013), G. Kalai (2016) 2 A. Harrow and A. Montanaro, Nature 549 , 203-209 (2017)

  8. Boson Sampling (I) Boson sampling 3 is one of the proposals to attain quantum advantage using photonic linear optical circuit (with Fock states and particle-number detectors). Task : sample from the distribution p BS for typical U ∈ SU( m ) . U It is hard to classically sample from a distribution ˜ p U satisfying U ) ≤ ǫ in time T = poly( n, 1 p U , p BS TV(˜ ǫ ) , where TV - total variation distance ( ∼ distinguishing probability). 3 S. Aaronson, A. Arkhipov, Proceedings of STOC’11 (2010)

  9. Boson Sampling (I) Boson sampling 3 is one of the proposals to attain quantum advantage using photonic linear optical circuit (with Fock states and particle-number detectors). Task : sample from the distribution p BS for typical U ∈ SU( m ) . U It is hard to classically sample from a distribution ˜ p U satisfying U ) ≤ ǫ in time T = poly( n, 1 p U , p BS TV(˜ ǫ ) , where TV - total variation distance ( ∼ distinguishing probability). 3 S. Aaronson, A. Arkhipov, Proceedings of STOC’11 (2010)

  10. Boson Sampling (I) Boson sampling 3 is one of the proposals to attain quantum advantage using photonic linear optical circuit (with Fock states and particle-number detectors). Task : sample from the distribution p BS for typical U ∈ SU( m ) . U It is hard to classically sample from a distribution ˜ p U satisfying U ) ≤ ǫ in time T = poly( n, 1 p U , p BS TV(˜ ǫ ) , where TV - total variation distance ( ∼ distinguishing probability). 3 S. Aaronson, A. Arkhipov, Proceedings of STOC’11 (2010)

  11. Boson Sampling (II) Arguments for hardness: difficulty of computation of matrix permanent , U ( n ) ∝ | Perm ( U n , s ) | 2 , p BS non-collapse of Polynomial Hierarchy , other conjectures. Interests due to recent developments in integrated photonics . State of the art: classical simulation for up to 50 photons 4 and seven photons 5 in experiments. It is not Boson-Sampling scalable ? 4 A. Neville et al. , Nature Physics 13 , 1153-1157 (2017) 5 Hui Wang et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 , 230502 (2018)

  12. Boson Sampling (II) Arguments for hardness: difficulty of computation of matrix permanent , U ( n ) ∝ | Perm ( U n , s ) | 2 , p BS non-collapse of Polynomial Hierarchy , other conjectures. Interests due to recent developments in integrated photonics . State of the art: classical simulation for up to 50 photons 4 and seven photons 5 in experiments. It is not Boson-Sampling scalable ? 4 A. Neville et al. , Nature Physics 13 , 1153-1157 (2017) 5 Hui Wang et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 , 230502 (2018)

  13. Boson Sampling (II) Arguments for hardness: difficulty of computation of matrix permanent , U ( n ) ∝ | Perm ( U n , s ) | 2 , p BS non-collapse of Polynomial Hierarchy , other conjectures. Interests due to recent developments in integrated photonics . State of the art: classical simulation for up to 50 photons 4 and seven photons 5 in experiments. It is not Boson-Sampling scalable ? 4 A. Neville et al. , Nature Physics 13 , 1153-1157 (2017) 5 Hui Wang et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 , 230502 (2018)

  14. Boson Sampling (II) Arguments for hardness: difficulty of computation of matrix permanent , U ( n ) ∝ | Perm ( U n , s ) | 2 , p BS non-collapse of Polynomial Hierarchy , other conjectures. Interests due to recent developments in integrated photonics . State of the art: classical simulation for up to 50 photons 4 and seven photons 5 in experiments. It is not Boson-Sampling scalable ? THIS WORK: EFFICIENT CLASSICAL SIMULATION OF BOSON SAMPLING UNDER (NONUNIFORM) PHOTON LOSSES 4 A. Neville et al. , Nature Physics 13 , 1153-1157 (2017) 5 Hui Wang et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 , 230502 (2018)

  15. Outline of the talk Motivation and introduction to Boson Sampling Main technical tools and the idea of classical simulation Classical simulation of lossy Boson Sampling for: (a) Uniform loss model (b) Lossy linear optical network

  16. Second vs. First Quantization Modes Particles

  17. Second vs. First Quantization Modes Particles Fock space H = Fock b ( C m ) Direct sum of symmetric spaces l =0 Sym l ( C m ) H = � ∞

  18. Second vs. First Quantization Modes Particles Fock space H = Fock b ( C m ) Direct sum of symmetric spaces l =0 Sym l ( C m ) H = � ∞ Fock states | n � = | n 1 , . . . , n m � | n � ∝ P sym | j 1 � ⊗ | j 2 � ⊗ . . . ⊗ | j n � , n i - # of times | i � appears

  19. Second vs. First Quantization Modes Particles Fock space H = Fock b ( C m ) Direct sum of symmetric spaces l =0 Sym l ( C m ) H = � ∞ Fock states | n � = | n 1 , . . . , n m � | n � ∝ P sym | j 1 � ⊗ | j 2 � ⊗ . . . ⊗ | j n � , n i - # of times | i � appears Mode transformation: a † j U ji a † Evolution of particles : ρ �→ U ⊗ n ρ ( U † ) ⊗ n i �→ � j

  20. Particle separable bosonic states An n particle bosonic state ρ is called particle separable ( ρ ∈ Sep ) iff � φ α | ⊗ n , where { p α } - prob. dist. � σ = p α | φ α � α Important features: Easy update of states | φ � ⊗ n under linear optics (acting like U ⊗ n ) The particle-number statistics of the state ( U | φ � ) ⊗ n is efficiently classically simulable by measuring individual particles ). If { p α } - easy to sample from, then sampling from ˜ p U corresponding to boson sampling with input state σ is efficiently classically simulable .

  21. Particle separable bosonic states An n particle bosonic state ρ is called particle separable ( ρ ∈ Sep ) iff � φ α | ⊗ n , where { p α } - prob. dist. � σ = p α | φ α � α Important features: Easy update of states | φ � ⊗ n under linear optics (acting like U ⊗ n ) The particle-number statistics of the state ( U | φ � ) ⊗ n is efficiently classically simulable by measuring individual particles ). If { p α } - easy to sample from, then sampling from ˜ p U corresponding to boson sampling with input state σ is efficiently classically simulable .

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend