Sanity check: Kitaev's quantum computing book

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a specific formula in Kitaev's quantum computing book related to measuring operators and the phase estimation algorithm. Participants are examining the mathematical formulation and its implications, particularly focusing on the structure of the equation involving the density matrix.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions a formula in Kitaev's book, suggesting it may contain a typo due to the absence of a double sum involving the measuring operator and its adjoint.
  • Another participant agrees with the initial concern, implying that there is an issue with the equation.
  • A different participant defends the equation, explaining that the density matrix is diagonal, which justifies the single sum in the formula. They also mention that observables must be real quantities, linking this to the trace operation.
  • A later reply acknowledges the diagonal nature of the density matrix but raises a concern about the lack of explicit assumption in Kitaev's text regarding this property.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the equation in question. While some believe there is an issue, others argue that the formulation is valid under certain conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of the equation.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential assumptions about the density matrix and its properties that are not explicitly stated in the text, leading to differing interpretations of the formula.

Physics Monkey
Homework Helper
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
34
I was flipping through Kitaev's quantum computing book today and noticed something really strange. I thought it might be fun to post it here and figure out what's going on.

See http://books.google.com/books?id=Tr...AEwAA#v=onepage&q=measuring operators&f=false for the relevant page. Basically he's talking about what he calls measuring operators, but then he gives a really strange formula (the action of W on the state midway down the page) which looks like a typo to me. In particular, why isn't there a double sum, one from W and one from W^+?

For those in know, he's basically describing how to measure eigenvalues of unitary operators using interference. This is part of the buildup to the phase estimation algorithm and various other algorithms for abelian groups.

Any thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems to me that you are right.
 
Hi,

There is no problem in the equation, the density matrix \rho is a diagonal matrix (with the probabilities of each state in the diagonal), that is why you have just a sum over one index. Actually you could see it otherwise, an Observable with physical must be a real quantity, then what you are doing in the previous definition is to take the trace.
 
arojo said:
Hi,

There is no problem in the equation, the density matrix \rho is a diagonal matrix (with the probabilities of each state in the diagonal), that is why you have just a sum over one index. Actually you could see it otherwise, an Observable with physical must be a real quantity, then what you are doing in the previous definition is to take the trace.

I agree that if the density matrix is diagonal then there is only one sum. However, I don't see where Kitaev has made that assumption.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
12K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K