No abstract

Randomized benchmarking (RB) is widely used to measure an error rate of a set of quantum gates, by performing random circuits that would do nothing if the gates were perfect. In the limit of no finite-sampling error, the exponential decay rate of the observable survival probabilities, versus circuit length, yields a single error metric r. For Clifford gates with arbitrary small errors described by process matrices, r was believed to reliably correspond to the mean, over all Clifford gates, of the average gate infidelity between the imperfect gates and their ideal counterparts. We show that this quantity is not a well-defined property of a physical gate set. It depends on the representations used for the imperfect and ideal gates, and the variant typically computed in the literature can differ from r by orders of magnitude. We present new theories of the RB decay that are accurate for all small errors describable by process matrices, and show that the RB decay curve is a simple exponential for all such errors. These theories allow explicit computation of the error rate that RB measures (r), but as far as we can tell it does not correspond to the infidelity of a physically allowed (completely positive) representation of the imperfect gates.

Adiabatic quantum computation (AQC) has been lauded for its inherent robustness to control imperfections and relaxation effects. A considerable body of previous work, however, has shown AQC to be acutely sensitive to noise that causes excitations from the adiabatically evolving ground state. In this paper, we develop techniques to mitigate such noise, and then we point out and analyze some obstacles to further progress. First, we examine two known techniques that leverage quantum error-detecting codes to suppress noise, and show that they are intimately related and may be analyzed within the same formalism. Next, we analyze the effectiveness of such error suppression techniques in AQC, identify critical constraints on their performance, and conclude that large-scale, fault tolerant AQC will require error correction, not merely suppression. Finally, we study the consequences of encoding AQC in quantum stabilizer codes, and discover that generic AQC problem Hamiltonians rapidly convert physical errors into uncorrectable logical errors. We present several techniques to remedy this problem, but all of them require unphysical resources, suggesting that the adiabatic model of quantum computation may be fundamentally incompatible with stabilizer quantum error correction. arXiv:1307.5893v3 [quant-ph]

No abstract