Error suppression for Hamiltonian-based quantum computation

Humberto Munoz-Bauza, Daniel A. Lidar

Jemma Bennett, Tom O’Leary, Mia West +2 more

Milad Marvian, Daniel A. Lidar

We present general conditions for quantum error suppression for Hamiltonian-based quantum computation using subsystem codes. This involves encoding the Hamiltonian performing the computation using an error detecting subsystem code and the addition of a penalty term that commutes with the encoded Hamiltonian. The scheme is general and includes the stabilizer formalism of both subspace and subsystem codes as special cases. We derive performance bounds and show that complete error suppression results in the large penalty limit. To illustrate the power of subsystem-based error suppression, we introduce fully two-local constructions for protection against local errors of the swap gate of adiabatic gate teleportation and the Ising chain in a transverse field.

Adam D. Bookatz, Edward Farhi, Leo Zhou

We consider the use of quantum error-detecting codes, together with energy penalties against leaving the code space, as a method for suppressing environmentally induced errors in Hamiltonian-based quantum computation. This method was introduced in Jordan et al. [Phys. Rev. A 74, 052322 (2006)] in the context of quantum adiabatic computation, but we consider it more generally. Specifically, we consider a computational Hamiltonian, which has been encoded using the logical qubits of a single-qubit error-detecting code, coupled to an environment of qubits by interaction terms that act one-locally on the system. Additional energy penalty terms penalize states outside of the code space. We prove that in the limit of infinitely large penalties, one-local errors are completely suppressed, and we derive some bounds for the finite penalty case. Our proof technique involves exact integration of the Schrodinger equation, making no use of master equations or their assumptions. We perform long time numerical simulations on a small (one logical qubit) computational system coupled to an environment and the results suggest that the energy penalty method achieves even greater protection than our bounds indicate.

Kaveh Khodjasteh

Kevin C Young, Mohan Sarovar, Robin Blume-Kohout