pith. sign in

arxiv: 2505.10110 · v3 · submitted 2025-05-15 · 🪐 quant-ph

Non-Clifford Cost of Random Unitaries

Lorenzo Leone , Salvatore F.E. Oliviero , Alioscia Hamma , Jens Eisert , Lennart Bittel This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 15:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Clifford circuitsnon-Clifford gatesunitary k-designsframe potentialrandom quantum circuitsdoped Clifford ensembleWeingarten functions
0
0 comments X

The pith

A quadratic number of non-Clifford gates is both necessary and sufficient to approximate the frame potential of the full unitary group with t-doped Clifford circuits

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines t-doped Clifford circuits, which are random Clifford circuits with t single-qubit non-Clifford gates added at random spots. It proves that to match the frame potential of truly random unitaries, the doping level t must be on the order of k squared, and this scaling is both required and enough. This tightens the understanding of when these circuits form good approximations to state k-designs. For relative-error approximations to k-designs, t must scale as n times k, and for pseudo-random unitaries, t scales as n. The results emphasize the substantial non-Clifford resources needed to generate random quantum behavior, placing such ensembles outside efficient classical simulation.

Core claim

We establish rigorous convergence bounds towards unitary k-designs for the ensemble of t-doped Clifford circuits. We prove that a quadratic doping level, t = tilde Theta(k^2), is both necessary and sufficient to approximate the frame potential of the full unitary group. This refines existing upper bounds on the convergence towards state k-designs. We derive tight bounds showing that t = tilde Theta(nk) is both necessary and sufficient for relative epsilon-approximate k-designs, and t = tilde Theta(n) for pseudo-random unitaries. We also introduce doped-Clifford Weingarten functions to derive analytic expressions for the twirling operator.

What carries the argument

The frame potential of the t-doped Clifford ensemble and the doped-Clifford Weingarten functions used to compute the twirling operator over this ensemble

If this is right

  • The ensemble approximates the unitary frame potential precisely when t reaches order k squared
  • Refined upper bounds apply to the distance from state k-designs
  • Relative-error k-designs form only when t reaches order n k
  • Pseudo-random unitaries appear once t reaches order n
  • The resulting ensembles lie beyond efficient classical simulation

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same quadratic scaling may govern other randomness measures such as higher moments or spectral gaps
  • Small-system numerics could directly test the necessity claim by computing frame potentials for t below k squared
  • Resource estimates for algorithms that use random unitaries could incorporate this non-Clifford cost

Load-bearing premise

The results depend on the ensemble being formed by randomly interleaving exactly t single-qubit non-Clifford gates within random Clifford circuits

What would settle it

Exact computation of the frame potential for small fixed k and a range of t values to check whether the unitary-group value is reached only for t of order k squared

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.10110 by Alioscia Hamma, Jens Eisert, Lennart Bittel, Lorenzo Leone, Salvatore F.E. Oliviero.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Pictorial representation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Recent years have enjoyed a strong interest in exploring properties and applications of random quantum circuits. In this work, we explore the ensemble of $t$-doped Clifford circuits on $n$ qubits, consisting of Clifford circuits interspersed with $t$ single-qubit non-Clifford gates. We establish rigorous convergence bounds towards unitary $k$-designs, revealing the intrinsic cost in terms of non-Clifford resources in various flavors. First, we analyze the $k$-th order frame potential, which quantifies how well the ensemble of doped Clifford circuits is spread within the unitary group. We prove that a quadratic doping level, $t = \tilde{\Theta}(k^2)$, is both necessary and sufficient to approximate the frame potential of the full unitary group. As a consequence, we refine existing upper bounds on the convergence of the ensemble towards state $k$-designs. Second, we derive tight bounds on the convergence of $t$-doped Clifford circuits towards relative-error $k$-designs, showing that $t = \tilde{\Theta}(nk)$ is both necessary and sufficient for the ensemble to form a relative $\varepsilon$-approximate $k$-design. Similarly, $t = \tilde{\Theta}(n)$ is required to generate pseudo-random unitaries. All these results highlight that generating random unitaries is extremely costly in terms of non-Clifford resources, and that such ensembles fundamentally lie beyond the classical simulability barrier. Additionally, we introduce doped-Clifford Weingarten functions to derive analytic expressions for the twirling operator over the ensemble of random doped Clifford circuits, and we establish their asymptotic behavior in relevant regimes.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the ensemble of t-doped Clifford circuits on n qubits formed by randomly inserting t single-qubit non-Clifford gates into random Clifford circuits. It proves that t = tilde Theta(k^2) is both necessary and sufficient to approximate the k-th frame potential of the full unitary group, refining existing upper bounds on convergence to state k-designs. It further shows that t = tilde Theta(nk) is necessary and sufficient for the ensemble to form a relative-error approximate k-design and that t = tilde Theta(n) is required for pseudo-random unitaries. The paper introduces doped-Clifford Weingarten functions to derive analytic expressions for the twirling operator and establishes their asymptotic behavior.

Significance. If the necessity and sufficiency claims hold, the work delivers tight characterizations of the non-Clifford overhead required to generate approximate random unitaries and designs, with direct implications for circuit complexity and the boundary of classical simulability. The explicit construction and asymptotic analysis of doped-Clifford Weingarten functions constitute a reusable technical tool for moment calculations on hybrid Clifford-non-Clifford ensembles. The combination of representation-theoretic lower bounds with matching upper bounds strengthens the results relative to prior literature that provided only one-sided estimates.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3, Theorem 3.2] §3, Theorem 3.2: The necessity argument that t = Omega(k^2) is required for frame-potential approximation is derived from the support of the moment operators under the random-interleaving construction; the lower bound is tied to this specific placement distribution and would require a separate argument if gate positions were chosen adversarially or fixed in advance.
  2. [§5.2, Eq. (5.8)] §5.2, Eq. (5.8): The sufficiency proof for relative-error k-designs invokes the asymptotic expansion of the doped Weingarten function; an explicit uniform bound on the remainder term is needed when k scales linearly with n to justify the tilde Theta(nk) statement across the full parameter regime claimed.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The tilde Theta notation is used without a short definition or reference; adding one sentence would improve accessibility for readers outside the immediate subfield.
  2. [§2.1] §2.1: The frame potential is defined via the integral over the unitary group, but the normalization constant is not restated in the doped-ensemble section; repeating it would aid comparison.
  3. [Figure 3] Figure 3 caption: The values of n and k used for the numerical curves are not listed; including them would make the figure self-contained.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each of the major comments below and have incorporated revisions to strengthen the presentation and rigor of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3, Theorem 3.2] §3, Theorem 3.2: The necessity argument that t = Omega(k^2) is required for frame-potential approximation is derived from the support of the moment operators under the random-interleaving construction; the lower bound is tied to this specific placement distribution and would require a separate argument if gate positions were chosen adversarially or fixed in advance.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's careful analysis of our necessity argument in Theorem 3.2. Indeed, the lower bound is established for the ensemble where the t non-Clifford gates are randomly interleaved within the Clifford circuit. This random placement is an integral part of the t-doped Clifford circuit model studied in the paper. Our results characterize the non-Clifford cost for this natural random ensemble. While a different placement strategy might yield different bounds, our focus is on the random-interleaving construction as defined. To address this point, we will add a clarifying remark in Section 3 specifying that the necessity holds under random gate placement. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5.2, Eq. (5.8)] §5.2, Eq. (5.8): The sufficiency proof for relative-error k-designs invokes the asymptotic expansion of the doped Weingarten function; an explicit uniform bound on the remainder term is needed when k scales linearly with n to justify the tilde Theta(nk) statement across the full parameter regime claimed.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this aspect of the proof in Section 5.2. The asymptotic expansion of the doped-Clifford Weingarten function is used to derive the convergence bounds. To ensure the result holds uniformly when k grows linearly with n, we will derive and include an explicit bound on the remainder term in the expansion. This bound can be obtained by carefully estimating the contributions from higher moments using the representation-theoretic properties of the Weingarten functions. We will update the manuscript to include this uniform error bound, thereby justifying the tilde Theta(nk) scaling in the full regime. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivations self-contained

full rationale

The paper establishes necessity and sufficiency of quadratic and linear doping levels through explicit computation of frame potentials, moment operators, and newly defined doped-Clifford Weingarten functions with stated asymptotic expansions. These steps rely on representation-theoretic lower bounds and direct analysis of the random-interleaving ensemble rather than any fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, self-referential definition, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The central claims on convergence to k-designs and pseudo-random unitaries remain independent of prior author results and are supported by the paper's own explicit constructions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard quantum-information axioms about the unitary group and Haar measure together with the newly introduced doped-Clifford Weingarten functions; no numerical free parameters are fitted to data.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Properties of the unitary group and its Haar measure define the target k-design moments.
    The frame potential and relative-error design definitions are taken directly from the standard Haar-random unitary ensemble.
invented entities (1)
  • doped-Clifford Weingarten functions no independent evidence
    purpose: Analytic computation of the twirling operator over the t-doped Clifford ensemble.
    New functions introduced to obtain closed-form expressions for averages over the mixed Clifford-plus-non-Clifford ensemble.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5835 in / 1428 out tokens · 53166 ms · 2026-05-22T15:07:47.965448+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. A journey through Flatland: What does the antiflatness of a spectrum teach us?

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Introduces antiflatness of entanglement spectra, antiflat majorization based on Rényi entropy spread, and unifies measures via escort distributions while connecting capacity of entanglement to quantum Fisher information.

  2. Non-stabilizerness and U(1) symmetry in chaotic many-body quantum systems

    quant-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Exact results show U(1) symmetry substantially suppresses non-stabilizerness in random states, with different leading scaling from entanglement near zero charge density.

  3. Certifying localizable quantum properties with constant sample complexity

    quant-ph 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A new framework certifies global quantum properties including multipartite entanglement, circuit complexity, and quantum magic on small subsystems with constant sample complexity via local Pauli measurements.

  4. Demonstrating an unconditional separation between quantum and classical information resources

    quant-ph 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Demonstrates a task solvable with 12 qubits but requiring 62-382 classical bits of memory, yielding unconditional quantum information supremacy on a trapped-ion processor.

  5. Operational interpretation of the Stabilizer Entropy

    quant-ph 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The stabilizer Rényi entropy governs the exponential rate at which Clifford orbits become indistinguishable from Haar-random states and sets the optimal distinguishability from stabilizer states in property testing.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 109 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    [73], the same bound hold for the Haar random ensemble

    Moreover, as also noted in Ref. [73], the same bound hold for the Haar random ensemble. Moreover we have that 7|P| 2 d ≤ 1 16 for every k ≥ 1 thanks to the hypothesis of the lemma. Therefore, we finally have X Ω̸∈Sk (∆Ω,Ω)t ≤ (|P| − k!) 15 16 t (104) 24 Now we established the key lemmas to show the convergence of doped random circuit in multiple flavours....

    work page

  2. [2]

    Note that the condition n ≥ f(k, t/2) ensures n ≥ 3 2(k2 − 3k + 26 + log 16

    Hence, a sufficient condition for applying Theorem 16 in this case is n ≥ 3 2(k2 − 3k + 26 + log 16 15). Note that the condition n ≥ f(k, t/2) ensures n ≥ 3 2(k2 − 3k + 26 + log 16

    work page

  3. [3]

    Y i U ⊗k i (⃗ αi) #† Ψ(k) Cl

    for any t, k ≥ 1. Applying Theorem 16, we can expressP Ω(∆t)Ω,Ω =P Ω(∆Ω,Ω)t ± 7|P| 4 d t∥∆∥t−1 ∞ . Now, applying Lemma 17 and Corollary 2, we have X Ω (∆t)Ω ≥ (|P| − k!) 2√π 3e2 √ k t − 7|P|4 d t∥∆∥t−1 ∞ . (110) To derive a nontrivial lower bound we require that 7|P| 4 d t∥∆∥t−1 ∞ ≤ 1 2(|P| − k!) 2√π 3e2√ k t . A sufficient condition to ensure it is given...

    work page 2046

  4. [4]

    Ambainis and A

    A. Ambainis and A. Smith, Small pseudo-random families of matrices: Derandomizing approximate quantum encryption, in Proc. RANDOM’04, Lecture Notes in Computer Science , Vol. 3122 (Springer, 2004) pp. 249– 260

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    Hayden, D

    P. Hayden, D. Leung, P. W. Shor, and A. Winter, Randomizing quantum states: Constructions and appli- cations, Commun. Math. Phys. 250, 371 (2004)

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Kretschmer, Quantum pseudorandomness and classical complexity, in TQC 2021, Vol

    W. Kretschmer, Quantum pseudorandomness and classical complexity, in TQC 2021, Vol. 197 (2021) pp. 2:1–2:20

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Morimae and T

    T. Morimae and T. Yamakawa, Quantum commitments and signatures without one-way functions, in CRYPTO 2022 (2022) pp. 269–295

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Ananth, L

    P. Ananth, L. Qian, and H. Yuen, Cryptography from pseudorandom quantum states, in CRYPTO 2022 (2022) pp. 208–236

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    P. Sen, Random measurement bases, quantum state distinction and applications to the hidden subgroup problem, in 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC’06) (2006) pp. 14–287

    work page 2006

  10. [10]

    F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao and M. Horodecki, Exponential quantum speed-ups are generic, Quant. Inf. Comp.13, 901 (2013)

    work page 2013

  11. [11]

    Boixo, S

    S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, N. Ding, Z. Jiang, M. J. Bremner, J. M. Martinis, and H. Neven, Characterizing quantum supremacy in near-term devices, Nature Phys. 14, 595 (2018)

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    Arute et al

    F. Arute et al. , Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature 574, 505 (2019)

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    Bouland, B

    A. Bouland, B. Fefferman, C. Nirkhe, and U. Vazirani, On the complexity and verification of quantum random circuit sampling, Nature Phys. 15, 159 (2019)

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Kueng, H

    R. Kueng, H. Rauhut, and U. Terstiege, Low rank matrix recovery from rank one measurements, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 42, 88 (2017)

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Kimmel and Y

    S. Kimmel and Y. Liu, Phase retrieval using unitary 2-designs, in2017 International Conference on Sampling Theory and Applications (SampTA) (2017) pp. 345–349

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    Distinguishing quantum states using Clifford orbits

    R. Kueng, H. Zhu, and D. Gross, Distinguishing quantum states using Clifford orbits (2016), arXiv:1609.08595

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  17. [17]

    Oszmaniec et al., Random bosonic states for robust quantum metrology, Phys

    M. Oszmaniec et al., Random bosonic states for robust quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041044 (2016)

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Eisert, D

    J. Eisert, D. Hangleiter, N. Walk, I. Roth, D. Markham, R. Parekh, U. Chabaud, and E. Kashefi, Quantum certification and benchmarking, Nature Rev. Phys. 2, 382–390 (2020)

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Dankert, R

    C. Dankert, R. Cleve, J. Emerson, and E. Livine, Exact and approximate unitary 2-designs and their application to fidelity estimation, Phys. Rev. A 80, 012304 (2009)

    work page 2009

  20. [20]

    Magesan, J

    E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, Scalable and robust randomized benchmarking of quantum processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 180504 (2011)

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    Magni, A

    B. Magni, A. Christopoulos, A. D. Luca, and X. Turkeshi, Anticoncentration in Clifford circuits and beyond: From random tensor networks to pseudo-magic states (2025), arXiv:2502.20455. 33

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Devetak, The private classical capacity and quantum capacity of a quantum channel, IEEE Trans

    I. Devetak, The private classical capacity and quantum capacity of a quantum channel, IEEE Trans. Inf. Th. 51, 44 (2005)

    work page 2005

  23. [23]

    Devetak and A

    I. Devetak and A. Winter, Relating quantum privacy and quantum coherence: An operational approach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 080501 (2004)

    work page 2004

  24. [24]

    Groisman, S

    B. Groisman, S. Popescu, and A. Winter, Quantum, classical, and total amount of correlations in a quantum state, Phys. Rev. A 72, 032317 (2005)

    work page 2005

  25. [25]

    Abeyesinghe et al., The mother of all protocols: Restructuring quantum information’s family tree, Proc

    A. Abeyesinghe et al., The mother of all protocols: Restructuring quantum information’s family tree, Proc. R. Soc. A 465, 2537 (2009)

    work page 2009

  26. [26]

    Dupuis et al., One-shot decoupling, Commun

    F. Dupuis et al., One-shot decoupling, Commun. Math. Phys. 328, 251 (2014)

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Szehr et al., Decoupling with unitary approximate two-designs, New J

    O. Szehr et al., Decoupling with unitary approximate two-designs, New J. Phys. 15, 053022 (2013)

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Horodecki, J

    M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Partial quantum information, Nature 436, 673–676 (2005)

    work page 2005

  29. [29]

    Horodecki, J

    M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Quantum state merging and negative information, Comm. Math. Phys. 269, 107–136 (2006)

    work page 2006

  30. [30]

    Nakata, E

    Y. Nakata, E. Wakakuwa, and H. Yamasaki, One-shot quantum error correction of classical and quantum information, Phys. Rev. A 104, 012408 (2021)

    work page 2021

  31. [31]

    Wakakuwa and Y

    E. Wakakuwa and Y. Nakata, One-shot triple-resource trade-off in quantum channel coding, IEEE Trans. Inf. Th. 69, 2400 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Popescu, A

    S. Popescu, A. J. Short, and A. Winter, Entanglement and the foundations of statistical mechanics, Nature Phys. 2, 754 (2006)

    work page 2006

  33. [33]

    Linden, S

    N. Linden, S. Popescu, A. J. Short, and A. Winter, Quantum mechanical evolution towards thermal equi- librium, Phys. Rev. E 79, 061103 (2009)

    work page 2009

  34. [34]

    del Rio et al., Relative thermalization, Phys

    L. del Rio et al., Relative thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 94, 022104 (2016)

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Kaneko et al

    K. Kaneko et al. , Characterizing complexity of many-body quantum dynamics by higher-order eigenstate thermalization, Phys. Rev. A 101, 042126 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Gogolin and J

    C. Gogolin and J. Eisert, Equilibration, thermalisation, and the emergence of statistical mechanics in closed quantum systems, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 56001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Ippoliti and W

    M. Ippoliti and W. W. Ho, Solvable model of deep thermalization with distinct design times, Quantum 6, 886 (2022)

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Hayden and J

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: Quantum information in random subsystems, J. High En. Phys. 2007, 120 (2007)

    work page 2007

  39. [39]

    Nakata et al., Black holes as clouded mirrors: the Hayden-Preskill protocol with symmetry, Quantum 7, 928 (2023)

    Y. Nakata et al., Black holes as clouded mirrors: the Hayden-Preskill protocol with symmetry, Quantum 7, 928 (2023)

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Onorati, O

    E. Onorati, O. Buerschaper, M. Kliesch, W. Brown, A. H. Werner, and J. Eisert, Mixing properties of stochastic quantum Hamiltonians, Commun. Math. Phys. 355, 905 (2017)

    work page 2017

  41. [41]

    Nakata, Y

    Y. Nakata, Y. Takeuchi, M. Kliesch, and A. Darmawan, On computational complexity of unitary and state design properties (2024), arXiv:2410.23353

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    S. F. E. Oliviero, L. Leone, S. Lloyd, and A. Hamma, Unscrambling quantum information with Clifford decoders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 080402 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, S. Lloyd, and A. Hamma, Learning efficient decoders for quasichaotic quantum scramblers, Phys. Rev. A 109, 022429 (2024)

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    Sekino and L

    Y. Sekino and L. Susskind, Fast scramblers, J. High En. Phys. 2008, 065 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    Lashkari, D

    N. Lashkari, D. Stanford, M. Hastings, T. Osborne, and P. Hayden, Towards the fast scrambling conjecture, J. High En. Phys. 2013, 22 (2013)

    work page 2013

  46. [46]

    Maldacena, S

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, A bound on chaos, J. High En. Phys. 2016, 106 (2016)

    work page 2016

  47. [47]

    D. A. Roberts and B. Yoshida, Chaos and complexity by design, J. High En. Phys. 2017, 121 (2017)

    work page 2017

  48. [48]

    J. S. Cotler et al., Emergent quantum state designs from individual many-body wave functions, PRX Quan- tum 4, 010311 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    D. K. Mark et al., Maximum entropy principle in deep thermalization and in Hilbert-space ergodicity, Phys. Rev. X 14, 041051 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Pilatowsky-Cameo et al., Hilbert-space ergodicity in driven quantum systems: Obstructions and designs, Phys

    S. Pilatowsky-Cameo et al., Hilbert-space ergodicity in driven quantum systems: Obstructions and designs, Phys. Rev. X 14, 041059 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Munson, N

    A. Munson, N. B. T. Kothakonda, J. Haferkamp, N. Yunger Halpern, J. Eisert, and P. Faist, Complexity- Constrained Quantum Thermodynamics, PRX Quantum 6, 010346 (2025)

    work page 2025

  52. [52]

    Emerson, Y

    J. Emerson, Y. S. Weinstein, M. Saraceno, S. Lloyd, and D. G. Cory, Pseudo-random unitary operators for Quant. Inf. Proc., Science 302, 2098 (2003)

    work page 2098

  53. [53]

    Gross, K

    D. Gross, K. Audenaert, and J. Eisert, Evenly distributed unitaries: On the structure of unitary designs, J. Math. Phys. 48, 052104 (2007)

    work page 2007

  54. [54]

    Haferkamp, F

    J. Haferkamp, F. Montealegre-Mora, M. Heinrich, J. Eisert, D. Gross, and I. Roth, Efficient unitary designs with a system-size independent number of non-Clifford gates, Commun. Math. Phys. 397, 995 (2023)

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, A. W. Harrow, and M. Horodecki, Local random quantum circuits are approximate polynomial-designs, Comm. Math. Phys. 346, 397 (2016)

    work page 2016

  56. [56]

    A. W. Harrow and R. A. Low, Random quantum circuits are approximate 2-designs, Comm. Math. Phys. 291, 302 (2009). 34

    work page 2009

  57. [57]

    A. W. Harrow and S. Mehraban, Approximate unitary t-designs by short random quantum circuits using nearest-neighbor and long-range gates, Comm. Math. Phys. 401, 1531–1626 (2023)

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    LaRacuente and F

    N. LaRacuente and F. Leditzky, Approximate unitary k-designs from shallow, low-communication circuits (2024), arXiv:2407.07876

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Ji, Y.-K

    Z. Ji, Y.-K. Liu, and F. Song, Pseudorandom quantum states, in Advances in Cryptology – CRYPTO 2018 (Springer International Publishing, 2018) p. 126–152

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    Metger, A

    T. Metger, A. Poremba, M. Sinha, and H. Yuen, Pseudorandom unitaries with non-adaptive security (2024), arXiv:2402.14803

    work page arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    Schuster, J

    T. Schuster, J. Haferkamp, and H.-Y. Huang, Random unitaries in extremely low depth (2025), arXiv:2407.07754

    work page arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    Ma and H.-Y

    F. Ma and H.-Y. Huang, How to construct random unitaries (2024), arXiv:2410.10116

    work page arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    T. Haug, K. Bharti, and D. E. Koh, Pseudorandom unitaries are neither real nor sparse nor noise-robust (2024), arXiv:2306.11677

    work page arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    Eastin and E

    B. Eastin and E. Knill, Restrictions on transversal encoded quantum gate sets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 110502 (2009)

    work page 2009

  65. [65]

    Gottesman, Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction, Ph.D

    D. Gottesman, Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction, Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology (1997)

    work page 1997

  66. [66]

    Webb, The Clifford group forms a unitary 3-design, QIC 16, 1379 (2016)

    Z. Webb, The Clifford group forms a unitary 3-design, QIC 16, 1379 (2016)

    work page 2016

  67. [67]

    Zhu, Multiqubit Clifford groups are unitary 3-designs, Phys

    H. Zhu, Multiqubit Clifford groups are unitary 3-designs, Phys. Rev. A 96, 062336 (2017)

    work page 2017

  68. [68]

    A. J. Scott, Optimizing quantum process tomography with unitary 2-designs, J. Phys. A 41, 055308 (2008)

    work page 2008

  69. [69]

    I. Roth, R. Kueng, S. Kimmel, Y.-K. Liu, D. Gross, J. Eisert, and M. Kliesch, Recovering quantum gates from few average gate fidelities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 170502 (2018)

    work page 2018

  70. [70]

    J. J. Wallman and S. T. Flammia, Randomized benchmarking with confidence, New J. Phys. 16, 103032 (2014)

    work page 2014

  71. [71]

    J. J. Wallman, Randomized benchmarking with gate-dependent noise, Quantum 2, 47 (2018)

    work page 2018

  72. [72]

    H. Zhu, R. Kueng, M. Grassl, and D. Gross, The Clifford group fails gracefully to be a unitary 4-design (2016), arXiv:1609.08172

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  73. [73]

    Deshpande, B

    A. Deshpande, B. Fefferman, S. Ghosh, M. Gullans, and D. Hangleiter, Peaked quantum advantage using error correction (2025), arXiv:2510.05262 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Zhang, S

    Y. Zhang, S. Vijay, Y. Gu, and Y. Bao, Designs from magic-augmented clifford circuits (2025), arXiv:2507.02828 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    Bittel, J

    L. Bittel, J. Eisert, L. Leone, A. A. Mele, and S. F. E. Oliviero, A complete theory of the Clifford commutant (2025), arXiv:2504.12263

    work page arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    Haferkamp, Random quantum circuits are approximate unitary t-designs in depth O(nt5+o(1)), Quantum 6, 795 (2022)

    J. Haferkamp, Random quantum circuits are approximate unitary t-designs in depth O(nt5+o(1)), Quantum 6, 795 (2022)

    work page 2022

  77. [77]

    S.-K. Jian, G. Bentsen, and B. Swingle, Linear growth of circuit complexity from Brownian dynamics (2022), arXiv:2206.14205

    work page arXiv 2022

  78. [78]

    Haferkamp, P

    J. Haferkamp, P. Faist, N. B. T. Kothakonda, J. Eisert, and N. Yunger Halpern, Linear growth of quantum circuit complexity, Nat. Phys. 18, 528 (2022)

    work page 2022

  79. [79]

    Kitaev, Hidden correlations in the Hawking radiation and thermal noise, in Talk given at the Fundamental Physics Prize Symposium , Vol

    A. Kitaev, Hidden correlations in the Hawking radiation and thermal noise, in Talk given at the Fundamental Physics Prize Symposium , Vol. 10 (2014)

    work page 2014

  80. [80]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, Y. Zhou, and A. Hamma, Quantum chaos is quantum, Quantum 5, 453 (2021)

    work page 2021

Showing first 80 references.