Abstract

In this paper we propose a technique for distributing entanglement in architectures in which interactions between pairs of qubits are constrained to a fixed networkG. This allows for two-qubit operations to be performed between qubits which are remote from each other inG, through gate teleportation. We demonstrate how adaptingquantum linear network codingto this problem of entanglement distribution in a network of qubits can be used to solve the problem of distributing Bell states and GHZ states in parallel, when bottlenecks inGwould otherwise force such entangled states to be distributed sequentially. In particular, we show that by reduction to classical network coding protocols for thek-pairs problem or multiple multicast problem in a fixed networkG, one can distribute entanglement between the transmitters and receivers with a Clifford circuit whose quantum depth is some (typically small and easily computed) constant, which does not depend on the size ofG, however remote the transmitters and receivers are, or the number of transmitters and receivers. These results also generalise straightforwardly to qudits of any prime dimension. We demonstrate our results using a specialised formalism, distinct from and more efficient than the stabiliser formalism, which is likely to be helpful to reason about and prototype such quantum linear network coding circuits.

Highlights

  • One of the most important problems to solve, in the realisation of quantum algorithms in hardware, is how to map operations onto the architecture

  • We demonstrate how adapting quantum linear network coding to this problem of entanglement distribution in a network of qubits can be used to solve the problem of distributing Bell states and GHZ states in parallel, when bottlenecks in G would otherwise force such entangled states to be distributed sequentially

  • We consider the problem of entanglement distribution in quantum architectures with constraints on the interactions between pairs of qubits, described by a network G

Read more

Summary

Introduction

One of the most important problems to solve, in the realisation of quantum algorithms in hardware, is how to map operations onto the architecture. Previous work [25, 26, 29, 38] has shown that when a classical binary linear network code exists for the “multiple unicast” problem (the problem of sending signals between k pairs of sources and targets) on a classical network, there exists a quantum network code to distribute Bell states between each source–target pair in a quantum network of the same connectivity These results suppose that each “node” is a small device, hosting multiple qubits and able to perform arbitrary transformations on them before transmitting onward “messages” through the network. This allows us to reason about them more efficiently than is possible even with the stabiliser formalism This yields at least a factor 2 improvement in space and time requirements, and achieves O(n) complexity (without using sparse matrix techniques) to simulate protocols which only involve superpositions of O(1) standard basis states. Which demonstrates the way in which a QLNC circuit may be regarded as realising a linear network code on an extended network G ⊇ G

Classical network coding
Quantum network coding
Other approaches to realise two-qubit operations in limited architectures
Sequential distribution of Bell pairs
Distribution of entanglement via graph states
Quantum Linear Network Coding circuits
A first sketch of QLNC circuits
Directly simulating classical linear network codes
Simulating classical linear network codes “out of order”
A separation between QLNC circuits and local transformations of graph states
The QLNC formalism
Parity formula states
QLNC operations on parity formula states
Depicting and simulating QLNC circuits
Using the QLNC formalism to design entanglement distribution circuits
Shallow QLNC circuits for entanglement distribution
Classical-quantum linear network codes
Generalisation to qudits of prime dimension
Generalising the QLNC formalism
Entanglement distribution using the qudit QLNC formalism
Comparison of the QLNC formalism to the stabiliser formalism
Proof of Theorem 5
Summary
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.