Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Generalized local complementation exactly captures LU-equivalence of graph states, with a logarithmic level bound that yields a quasi-polynomial decision algorithm and proves LU=LC up to 19 qubits.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 19:51 UTC pith:27K6BFWT

load-bearing objection A strong, likely-correct thesis on LU-equivalence of graph states, but the proof of Theorem 6 has a real gap that needs fixing before the main claims can be trusted as written. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2511.22271 v2 pith:27K6BFWT submitted 2025-11-27 quant-ph cs.DM

Local Equivalences of Graph States

Nathan Claudet This is my paper
classification quant-ph cs.DM
keywords graph statesLU-equivalencelocal complementationr-local complementationstabilizer statesentanglement classificationquasi-polynomial algorithmvertex-minor universality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This thesis establishes a purely graph-theoretic characterization of when two graph states have the same entanglement under local unitary operations. The key object is r-local complementation, a parameterized generalization of the familiar local complementation rule; the main theorem states that two graph states are LU-equivalent exactly when their graphs are connected by r-local complementations for some r. Because r can be capped at logarithmic order, LU-equivalence becomes decidable in quasi-polynomial time, a jump from exponential. The same formalism reveals an infinite strict hierarchy of intermediate local equivalences between LC and LU, and proves that all graph states with at most 19 qubits satisfy LU=LC.

Core claim

The central claim is that LU-equivalence of graph states reduces entirely to a graph-theoretic rule: if two graph states are LU-equivalent, then their graphs are related by r-local complementations for some r ≤ n, and conversely. Here 1-local complementation is the classical local complementation, so LC-equivalence is the base of the hierarchy. Sharpening the bound, for n>7 the required level satisfies r ≤ ceil(log2((n+1)/8)), which makes the LU-equivalence decision problem quasi-polynomial and implies that every graph state on at most 19 qubits has the same LU- and LC-orbits.

What carries the argument

r-local complementation G ⋆r S, defined for an r-incident independent multiset S of vertices, toggles an edge (u,v) precisely when the number of common neighbors of u and v in S is 2^{r-1} modulo 2^r. It is implemented by local X- and Z-rotations, so it is a genuine local unitary action on the graph state; level 1 is ordinary local complementation. The level r measures how far beyond Clifford operations a local equivalence must go, and the r-incidence condition is exactly what keeps the transformed object a graph state rather than a general weighted hypergraph state.

Load-bearing premise

The whole approach leans on the combinatorial lower bound that any genuinely level-r transformation forces the graph to contain at least 2^{r+2} vertices; if a smaller graph admitted such a transformation, the logarithmic bound collapses.

What would settle it

Search for a graph of order n < 2^{r+2} carrying a genuine r-incident independent multiset S whose r-local complementation cannot be simulated at level r-1; even one such pair would refute the combinatorial lower bound, undo the r = O(log n) bound, and force the decision algorithm back to exponential time.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Two graph states on at most 19 qubits that are locally unitarily equivalent are always locally Clifford equivalent, so no counterexample to LU=LC exists below 20 qubits.
  • LU-equivalence of graph states can be decided classically in time n^{log n + O(1)}, replacing previously exponential methods.
  • There is no single finite level r whose r-local complementations capture LU-equivalence for all graphs; the gap between LC- and LU-equivalence is an infinite strict hierarchy of LCr-equivalences.
  • SLOCC-equivalence coincides with LU-equivalence for graph states, so the same graphical criterion also classifies entanglement under stochastic local operations and classical communication.
  • Every graph is covered by minimal local sets, and such a cover can be constructed in polynomial time, anchoring the standard-form reduction used in the characterization.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The minimal level r needed to connect two LU-equivalent graph states could serve as a natural resource measure: a 'non-Clifford depth' of local equivalence, potentially useful in magic-state resource theories.
  • The 19-qubit threshold is not claimed minimal; a computer search over graph states of 20 to 26 vertices guided by the r-local complementation rule could pinpoint the smallest order at which LU and LC orbits separate.
  • The linear-constraint extension of the standard LC-equivalence algorithm may apply to other graph isomorphism problems phrased as local complementation with restrictions, not just state-equivalence questions.
  • If the combinatorial lower bound at the heart of the logarithmic estimate is sharpened, the bound on r would improve accordingly, possibly yielding a polynomial-time LU-equivalence algorithm or a higher LU=LC threshold.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The thesis develops a purely graph-theoretic characterization of local unitary (LU) equivalence for graph states. It introduces r-local complementation and LCr-equivalence, proves that LU-equivalent graph states are LCr-equivalent for some r ≤ n, shows that the LCr-equivalences form an infinite strict hierarchy, and derives a quasi-polynomial algorithm for deciding LU-equivalence. It also proves LU=LC for all graph states up to 19 qubits and studies vertex-minor universal graphs. The central claimed results are Theorem 6 (LU implies LCr for some r), Theorem 7 (strict hierarchy), Theorem 9 (logarithmic level bound), Theorem 10 (quasi-polynomial algorithm), and the 19-qubit LU=LC bound in Chapter 6.

Significance. If correct, the results would resolve the structure of local equivalence of graph states: LU-equivalence would be exactly captured by a purely graph-theoretic rule, the LC/LU gap would be an infinite strict hierarchy, and LU-equivalence would be decidable in quasi-polynomial time. The thesis is largely self-contained and contains several first-principles proofs, explicit constructions (e.g., the C_{t,k}/C'_{t,k} hierarchy), and a detailed algorithmic reduction to a constrained version of Bouchet's algorithm. The parity arguments in Lemmas 20–21 and the constructive hierarchy of Chapter 4 are substantial contributions in their own right. However, a load-bearing proof gap in Theorem 6 prevents me from endorsing the central claim as it stands.

major comments (2)
  1. [Chapter 4, proof of Theorem 6] The induction over K ⊆ VZ applies Lemma 12 to the set VZ\K and uses the resulting congruence modulo π/2^{|VZ|-|K|-2+δ(|VZ|-|K|-2)}. This is a strictly coarser modulus than the claimed π/2^{|VZ|-2+δ(|VZ|-2)} whenever K is nonempty. Vanishing modulo a coarser modulus does not imply vanishing modulo the finer modulus used in the induction, so the step 'by Lemma 12' is not justified. The gap is not merely cosmetic: the intermediate assertion is actually false. For |VZ|=4 and four X-vertices whose neighborhoods are the four 3-subsets of VZ, assigning α=π/2 to each X-vertex satisfies all congruences of Lemma 12 (each 2-subset sum is π, each 3-subset sum is π/2, the 4-subset sum is empty), yet the angles are not 0 modulo π/4, the modulus claimed by the induction. This does not disprove Theorem 6—the configuration is already LC1—but it shows the proof's stronger inductive claim cannot be correct
  2. [Chapter 4, Theorem 5 (3⇒2)] The statement 'A local complementation is, in particular, an r-local complementation' is not immediate from the definition of r-local complementation for r≥2. It is true, but only via the multiset construction S=2^{r-1}{a} (using Proposition 45), and the proof should say so explicitly. Since Theorem 5 is used repeatedly, this missing detail should be supplied.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Proposition 44] In the proof, the 'if and only if' condition over K⊆V is written as 'for any K⊆V' with exponent r-|K|+2-δ(|K|-2). For |K|>r+1 the exponent is negative and the condition is not meaningful. The intended statement is restricted to 2≤|K|≤r+1, matching Definition 16. Please make this restriction explicit.
  2. [Notation] The Kronecker delta δ used in Lemma 12 and in the proof of Theorem 6 is defined only in Definition 16. Since Chapter 4 is meant to be readable independently, re-state the convention (δ(0)=1, δ(x)=0 otherwise) where Lemma 12 is stated.
  3. [Abstract / front matter] The abstract writes the quasi-polynomial running time as O(nlogn); this should be O(n^{log n}) (or n^{O(log n)}). The same typo appears in the French résumé.
  4. [Chapter 7] The vertex-minor universality chapter is interesting but appears largely independent of the LU-equivalence results. A short paragraph in Chapter 1 or 7 connecting this notion to LCr-equivalence and LU-equivalence would help the reader understand the overall arc of the thesis.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the LU/LC_r characterization is derived, not assumed; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. The r-local complementation is introduced as a graph operation (Definitions 16–17) and then shown, via the weighted-hypergraph phase computation (Propositions 43–44), to be exactly the action of X-rotations of angle π/2^r on graph states; the equivalence in Proposition 44 is derived as an iff condition, not assumed to force the target. The LU⇒LCr result (Theorem 6) is obtained from the standard-form machinery: Lemma 12's angle constraints are consequences of the hypergraph formula, and the induction over common neighborhoods is a proof step rather than a renaming or fitted input. The logarithmic bound (Proposition 56, Theorem 9) rests on the internally proved support-size lower bounds of Lemmas 20–21, and the quasi-polynomial algorithm inherits that bound. Known external facts—the 27-vertex counterexample, Bouchet's algorithm—are used as benchmarks, and Bouchet's LC characterization is re-proved in Section 2.5.3. The author's prior papers are cited for the MLS-cover tools and some proof details, but those proofs are either reproduced in the thesis or are independent peer-reviewed results; no load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation. The explicit limitation in Remark 9 (the open 'Class α' case) concerns completeness of the constrained LC algorithm, not circularity of the main characterization. The reviewer's proof-gap concern about Theorem 6 is a correctness issue, not an input-output tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted: all quantities are derived from the r-incidence conditions, and the hierarchy angles are exact multiples of π/2^r rather than fitted values; the constant α > 2 in the vertex-minor construction is the free choice of an existence theorem, not fitted. The r-local complementation is a new mathematical rule, not a postulated physical entity, and it carries independent evidence (it matches the known counterexamples and yields the hierarchy).

axioms (7)
  • standard math Cut-rank function satisfies symmetry, linear boundedness, and submodularity (Bouchet; Oum-Seymour [65]).
    Invoked throughout Ch. 3-4 (Prop. 25-26, Lemmas 2-4) to establish MLS covers and full-cut-rank sets, the foundation of the type machinery.
  • standard math Local complementation exactly captures LC-equivalence of graph states (Van den Nest et al.; Bouchet's equations [45,56]).
    The external anchor: r-local complementation is defined as its generalization, and LC1 = LC is assumed as known. A self-contained proof of Bouchet's characterization is given in §2.5.3-2.5.4.
  • standard math Two graph states are SLOCC-equivalent iff LU-equivalent (Prop. 14, [46]).
    Used to identify LU-equivalence with 'same entanglement' (Cor. 1); cited from the literature, not re-proven.
  • standard math Any local unitary relating LU-equivalent graph states decomposes as Clifford ∘ Z-rotation ∘ Clifford per qubit (Prop. 15, [47,48]).
    Load-bearing for Prop. 41 (LCr characterization) and Prop. 50 in Ch. 4; cited, not re-proven.
  • standard math Single-qubit unitaries in level r+1 of the Clifford hierarchy are exactly products of H and Z(π/2^r) (Prop. 41, [78,79]).
    Defines the physical meaning of LCr-equivalence in terms of the Clifford hierarchy; cited.
  • domain assumption Existence of graphs of order n with local minimum degree ≥ 0.189n (Prop. 38, [69]).
    Used in Ch. 3 to exhibit graphs whose MLS are all large; an external existence result from the graph-minor literature.
  • domain assumption Known LU-but-not-LC counterexamples of order 27 ([43,49]) are accepted as external benchmarks.
    The hierarchy (Thm. 7) generalizes these; the thesis does not re-derive the non-LC part of [49], it provides its own non-LCr proof for its family.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 67847 in / 42238 out tokens · 339603 ms · 2026-08-03T19:51:37.353843+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Graph states form a large family of quantum states that are in one-to-one correspondence with mathematical graphs. Graph states are used in many applications, such as measurement-based quantum computation, as multipartite entangled resources. It is thus crucial to understand when two such states have the same entanglement, i.e. when they can be transformed into each other using only local operations. In this case, we say that the graph states are LU-equivalent (local unitary). If the local operations are restricted to the so-called Clifford group, we say that the graph states are LC-equivalent (local Clifford). Interestingly, a simple graph rule called local complementation fully captures LC-equivalence, in the sense that two graph states are LC-equivalent if and only if the underlying graphs are related by a sequence of local complementations. While it was once conjectured that two LU-equivalent graph states are always LC-equivalent, counterexamples do exist and local complementation fails to fully capture the entanglement of graph states. We introduce in this thesis a generalization of local complementation that does fully capture LU-equivalence. Using this characterization, we prove the existence of an infinite strict hierarchy of local equivalences between LC- and LU-equivalence. This also leads to the design of a quasi-polynomial algorithm for deciding whether two graph states are LU-equivalent, and to a proof that two LU-equivalent graph states are LC-equivalent if they are defined on at most 19 qubits. Furthermore, we study graph states that are universal in the sense that any smaller graph state, defined on any small enough set of qubits, can be induced using only local operations. We provide bounds and an optimal, probabilistic construction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.22271 by Nathan Claudet.

Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1: The Bloch sphere. A single-qubit quantum state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_2_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.2. Figure 2.2: Each of the 24 single-qubit Clifford gates (up to global phase) and the action of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_2_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.3. Figure 2.3: Construction of a 3-qubit graph state. (Left) We start with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.4. Figure 2.4: A 27-vertex counter-example to the LU=LC conjecture, that is, a pair of graphs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_2_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.5. Figure 2.5: Example of a local complementation. Vertex 2 is related to vertices 1,3 and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_2_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: Illustration of a pivoting on an edge (u, v) in a graph G. A denotes NG(u) \ ({v} ∪ NG(v)), B denotes NG(u) ∩ NG(v), and C denotes NG(v) \ ({u} ∪ NG(u)). The vertices adjacent neither to u nor v are not represented, as the pivoting does not modify their neighborhood. To simplify the drawing, we assume that the vertices of the sets A, B and C are not adjacent. In general, the pivoting performs a symmetric… view at source ↗
Figure 2.7
Figure 2.7. Figure 2.7: Illustration of a pivoting on an edge (u, v) in a bipartite graph G. A denotes NG(u) \ {v} and B denotes NG(v) \ {u}. The vertices adjacent neither to u nor v are not represented, as the pivoting does not modify their neighborhood. To simplify the drawing, we assume that the vertices of the sets A and B are not adjacent. In general, the pivot￾ing performs a symmetric difference with the complete bipartit… view at source ↗
Figure 2.8
Figure 2.8. Figure 2.8: The Petersen graph. This graph is not LU-equivalent to the graph obtained from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_2_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: (Left) A local set generated by D = {1}: Odd(D) = {2, 4}. This is not a minimal local set. (Right) A local set generated by D = {2, 4}: Odd(D) = ∅. In particular, this is a minimal local set, as neither {2}, {4} nor ∅ is a local set. 40 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_3_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: Illustration of a minimal local set of size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_3_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: Illustration of a minimal local set of size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_3_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.4. Figure 3.4: Illustration of a minimal local set of size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_3_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.5. Figure 3.5: The path P7 of order 7. P7 has minimal local sets from every size ranging from 2 to 4, for example {1, 2}, {1, 3, 4}, and {1, 3, 5, 6}, generated respectively by {1}, {1, 3}, and {1, 3, 5}. Proof. Let Pn be a path of order n > 2 on vertices 1, . . . , n such that, for any i, there is an edge between i and i + 1. For any k ∈ [0, ⌈n/2⌉ − 2], let Dk := {1, 3, 5, . . . , 2k + 1}. The local set Lk generated b… view at source ↗
Figure 3.6
Figure 3.6. Figure 3.6: (Left) The complete graph K5 of order 5. The minimal local sets are exactly the pairs of vertices (for example {1, 2}, {3, 5}). (Right) The bipartite complete graph K3,3 of order 6. The minimal local sets are exactly the pairs of two leftmost vertices ({1, 2}, {1, 3}, and {2, 3}), and the pairs of two rightmost vertices ({4, 5}, {4, 6}, and {5, 6}). 46 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_3_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.7
Figure 3.7. Figure 3.7: The graph K3,3∆M3 of order 6. Every set containing an odd number of leftmost vertices generates a minimal local set: {l1}, {l2}, {l3}, and {l1, l2, l3} generate respectively the minimal local sets {l1, r1, r2}, {l2, r1, r3}, {l3, r2, r3}, and {l1, l2, l3}. Proof. We write Kk,k∆Mk = (L ∪ R, E) with L = {l1, . . . , lk} and R = {r1, . . . , rk}, such that for any i and j, (li , lj ) ∈/ E, (ri , rj ) ∈/ E a… view at source ↗
Figure 3.8
Figure 3.8. Figure 3.8: MLS covers of 3 graphs. To cover a vertex u of a graph G with a minimal local set, one can consider the local set generated by u, i.e. its closed neighborhood {u} ∪ N(u). However, such a local set is not always minimal, worse yet, it does not necessarily contain a minimal local set that includes u. Indeed, in the cycle C4 of order 4, for every vertex u, {u}∪N(u) contains a single minimal local set that d… view at source ↗
Figure 3.9
Figure 3.9. Figure 3.9: Example of a graph of order 15 where a naive approach for finding an MLS cover, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p050_3_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.10
Figure 3.10. Figure 3.10: Pseudocode of the efficient algorithm to construct an MLS cover. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p053_3_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: Illustration of the action of an X-rotation over a vertex of a graph state. Applying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p057_4_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: Illustration on a 1-local complementation over the set [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p059_4_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: Illustration of a 2-local complementation over the multiset [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p060_4_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4: Illustration of a graph in standard form. Vertices of type X form an independent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p067_4_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.5
Figure 4.5. Figure 4.5: (Left) The graph C4,2. (Right) The graph C ′ 4,2 . For some parameters t and k, Ct,k and C ′ t,k are in standard form with respect to the maximal MLS cover Mmax = {L ⊆ V | L is a minimal local set}. Proposition 51. For any odd k ⩾ 3, t ⩾ k + 2, Ct,k and C ′ t,k are in standard form, with respect to Mmax, for any ordering such that, for any u ∈ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p075_4_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: (Left) The complete-graph-based repeater graph state of order 10. (Right) The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p092_6_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.1. Figure 7.1: (Left) The graph K3 is 2-vertex-minor universal. (Middle) The graph C6 is 3- vertex-minor universal. (Right) The "wheel" graph of order 10 is 4-vertex-minor universal. 2-vertex-minor universality. As we saw above, K2 is not 2-vertex-minor universal: K3 (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p100_7_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.2. Figure 7.2: Parameters for which a randomly generated bipartite graph is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p105_7_2.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The Structure of Circle Graph States

    quant-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Circle graphs are closed under r-local complementation and bipartite circle graph states correspond one-to-one with planar code states whose MBQC is classically simulable.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [7]

    Richard P. Feynman. Simulating physics with computers.International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 21(6):467–488, Jun 1982.doi:10.1007/BF02650179

    doi:10.1007/bf02650179 1982

  2. [8]

    Peter W. Shor. Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete loga- rithms on a quantum computer.SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(5):1484–1509, 1997. arXiv:quant-ph/9508027,doi:10.1137/S0097539795293172

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  3. [9]

    Robert Raussendorf and Hans J. Briegel. A one-way quantum computer.Physical Review Letters, 86(22):5188, 2001.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.5188

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.86.5188 2001

  4. [10]

    Browne, and Hans J

    Robert Raussendorf, Daniel E. Browne, and Hans J. Briegel. Measurement-based quan- tum computation on cluster states.Physical review A, 68(2):022312, 2003.arXiv: quant-ph/0301052,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.68.022312

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  5. [11]

    Briegel, David E

    Hans J. Briegel, David E. Browne, Wolfgang Dür, Robert Raussendorf, and Maarten Van den Nest. Measurement-based quantum computation.Nature Physics, 5(1):19–26, 2009.arXiv:0910.1116,doi:10.1038/nphys1157

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  6. [12]

    Persistententanglementinarraysofinteracting particles.Physical Review Letters, 86:910–913, Jan 2001.arXiv:quant-ph/0004051, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.910

    HansJ.BriegelandRobertRaussendorf. Persistententanglementinarraysofinteracting particles.Physical Review Letters, 86:910–913, Jan 2001.arXiv:quant-ph/0004051, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.910

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  7. [13]

    Marc Hein, Jens Eisert, and Hans J. Briegel. Multiparty entanglement in graph states.Physical Review A, 69(6), Jun 2004.arXiv:quant-ph/0307130,doi:10.1103/ physreva.69.062311

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  8. [14]

    Resources required for preparing graph states

    Peter Høyer, Mehdi Mhalla, and Simon Perdrix. Resources required for preparing graph states. InProceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Algorithms and Compu- tation (ISAAC 2006), Dec 2006. URL: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01378771, doi:10.1007/11940128\_64

    doi:10.1007/11940128 2006

  9. [15]

    López-Tarrida, and José R

    Adán Cabello, Lars Eirik Danielsen, Antonio J. López-Tarrida, and José R. Portillo. Optimal preparation of graph states.Physical Review A, 83:042314, Apr 2011.arXiv: 1011.5464,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.83.042314

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  10. [16]

    Economou

    Antonio Russo, Edwin Barnes, and Sophia E. Economou. Photonic graph state genera- tion from quantum dots and color centers for quantum communications.Physical Review B, 98(8):085303, 2018.arXiv:1801.02754,doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.98.085303. 110

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [17]

    Economou, and Edwin Barnes

    Bikun Li, Sophia E. Economou, and Edwin Barnes. Photonic resource state generation from a minimal number of quantum emitters.npj Quantum Information, 8(1):11, Feb 2022.arXiv:2108.12466,doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00522-6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  12. [18]

    Optimization of deterministic photonic-graph-state generation via local operations.Physical Review A, 110:052605, Nov 2024.arXiv:2401.00635,doi:10

    Sobhan Ghanbari, Jie Lin, Benjamin MacLellan, Luc Robichaud, Piotr Roztocki, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. Optimization of deterministic photonic-graph-state generation via local operations.Physical Review A, 110:052605, Nov 2024.arXiv:2401.00635,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevA.110.052605

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [19]

    Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction, 1997.arXiv: quant-ph/9705052

    Daniel Gottesman. Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction, 1997.arXiv: quant-ph/9705052

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  14. [20]

    Graphs, quadratic forms, and quantum codes

    Markus Grassl, Andreas Klappenecker, and Martin Rotteler. Graphs, quadratic forms, and quantum codes. InProceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT 2002), pages 45–, 2002.arXiv:quant-ph/0703112,doi: 10.1109/ISIT.2002.1023317

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  15. [21]

    Arthur Robert Calderbank and Peter W. Shor. Good quantum error-correcting codes exist.Physical Review A, 54:1098–1105, Aug 1996.arXiv:quant-ph/9512032,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.1098

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  16. [22]

    Multiple-particle interference and quantum error correction.Proceed- ings of the Royal Society of London

    Andrew Steane. Multiple-particle interference and quantum error correction.Proceed- ings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 452(1954):2551–2577, 1996.arXiv:quant-ph/9601029,doi:10.1098/rspa. 1996.0136

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1954

  17. [23]

    The Heisenberg representation of quantum computers

    Daniel Gottesman. The Heisenberg representation of quantum computers. 1998.arXiv: quant-ph/9807006

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  18. [24]

    Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits

    Scott Aaronson and Daniel Gottesman. Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits. Physical Review A, 70:052328, Nov 2004.arXiv:quant-ph/0406196,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevA.70.052328

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  19. [25]

    Dirk Schlingemann and Reinhard F. Werner. Quantum error-correcting codes associated with graphs.Physical Review A, 65(1):012308, 2001.arXiv:quant-ph/0012111,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.65.012308

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  20. [26]

    Stabilizer codes can be realized as graph codes, 2001.arXiv: quant-ph/0111080

    Dirk Schlingemann. Stabilizer codes can be realized as graph codes, 2001.arXiv: quant-ph/0111080

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  21. [27]

    PhD thesis, 2025.arXiv: 2501.17959

    Andrey Boris Khesin.Quantum Computing from Graphs. PhD thesis, 2025.arXiv: 2501.17959

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [28]

    Damian Markham and Barry C. Sanders. Graph states for quantum secret sharing. Physical Review A, 78(4):042309, 2008.arXiv:0808.1532,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA. 78.042309. 111

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  23. [29]

    Adrian Keet, Ben Fortescue, Damian Markham, and Barry C. Sanders. Quantum secret sharing with qudit graph states.Physical Review A, 82:062315, Dec 2010.arXiv: 1004.4619,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.82.062315

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  24. [30]

    New protocols and lower bounds for quantum secret sharing with graph states

    Jérôme Javelle, Mehdi Mhalla, and Simon Perdrix. New protocols and lower bounds for quantum secret sharing with graph states. InProceedings of the 7th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication, and Cryptography (TQC 2012), pages 1–12, 2013.arXiv:1109.1487,doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35656-8_1

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  25. [31]

    Quantum secret sharingwithgraphstates

    Sylvain Gravier, Jérôme Javelle, Mehdi Mhalla, and Simon Perdrix. Quantum secret sharingwithgraphstates. InProceedings of the 8th Mathematical and Engineering Meth- ods in Computer Science International Doctoral Workshop (MEMICS 2012), 2013. URL: https://hal.science/hal-00933722/document,doi:10.1007/978-3-642-36046-6_3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-36046-6_3 2012

  26. [32]

    B. A. Bell, Damian Markham, D. A. Herrera-Martí, Anne Marin, W. J. Wadsworth, J. G. Rarity, and M. S. Tame. Experimental demonstration of graph-state quantum secret sharing.Nature Communications, 5(1):5480, Nov 2014.arXiv:1411.5827,doi: 10.1038/ncomms6480

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  27. [33]

    All-photonic quantum repeaters

    Koji Azuma, Kiyoshi Tamaki, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. All-photonic quantum repeaters. Nature communications, 6(1):1–7, 2015.arXiv:1309.7207,doi:10.1038/ncomms7787

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  28. [34]

    Economou, David Elkouss, Paul Hilaire, Liang Jiang, Hoi- Kwong Lo, and Ilan Tzitrin

    Koji Azuma, Sophia E. Economou, David Elkouss, Paul Hilaire, Liang Jiang, Hoi- Kwong Lo, and Ilan Tzitrin. Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet.Reviews of Modern Physics, 95(4):045006, 2023.arXiv:2212.10820, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.95.045006

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  29. [35]

    Quantum network routing and local complementation.npj Quantum Information, 5(1):1–7, 2019.arXiv:1805.04559,doi: 10.1038/s41534-019-0191-6

    Frederik Hahn, Anna Pappa, and Jens Eisert. Quantum network routing and local complementation.npj Quantum Information, 5(1):1–7, 2019.arXiv:1805.04559,doi: 10.1038/s41534-019-0191-6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  30. [36]

    Generatingkepr- pairs from ann-party resource state.Quantum, 8:1348, 2024.arXiv:2211.06497, doi:10.22331/q-2024-05-14-1348

    Sergey Bravyi, Yash Sharma, Mario Szegedy, and Ronald de Wolf. Generatingkepr- pairs from ann-party resource state.Quantum, 8:1348, 2024.arXiv:2211.06497, doi:10.22331/q-2024-05-14-1348

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [37]

    Distributing graph states over arbitrary quantum networks.Physical Review A, 100:052333, Nov 2019

    Clément Meignant, Damian Markham, and Frédéric Grosshans. Distributing graph states over arbitrary quantum networks.Physical Review A, 100:052333, Nov 2019. arXiv:1811.05445,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.100.052333

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  32. [38]

    Distributing graph states across quantum networks

    Alex Fischer and Don Towsley. Distributing graph states across quantum networks. InProceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), pages 324–333, 2021.arXiv:2009.10888,doi:10.1109/ QCE52317.2021.00049

    arXiv 2021

  33. [39]

    Multiparty entanglement routing in quantum networks.Physical Review A, 108:062614, Dec 2023.arXiv:2211.06690,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevA.108.062614

    Vaisakh Mannalath and Anirban Pathak. Multiparty entanglement routing in quantum networks.Physical Review A, 108:062614, Dec 2023.arXiv:2211.06690,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevA.108.062614. 112

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  34. [40]

    Vertex-minors of graphs: A survey.Discrete Ap- plied Mathematics, 351:54–73, 2024

    Donggyu Kim and Sang-il Oum. Vertex-minors of graphs: A survey.Discrete Ap- plied Mathematics, 351:54–73, 2024. URL: https://dimag.ibs.re.kr/home/donggyu/ wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2023/04/2023-survey-Vertex-minors-of-graphs.pdf,doi: 10.1016/j.dam.2024.03.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.dam.2024.03.011 2024

  35. [41]

    Transforming graph states to Bell-pairs is NP-Complete.Quantum, 4:348, Oct 2020.arXiv:1907.08019,doi:10

    Axel Dahlberg, Jonas Helsen, and Stephanie Wehner. Transforming graph states to Bell-pairs is NP-Complete.Quantum, 4:348, Oct 2020.arXiv:1907.08019,doi:10. 22331/q-2020-10-22-348

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [42]

    Olaf Krueger and Reinhard F. Werner. Some open problems in quantum information theory, 2005.arXiv:quant-ph/0504166

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  37. [43]

    The LU-LC conjecture is false.Quantum Information and Computation, 10(1):97–108, Jan 2010.arXiv: 0709.1266,doi:QIC10.1-2-8.html

    Zhengfeng Ji, Jianxin Chen, Zhaohui Wei, and Mingsheng Ying. The LU-LC conjecture is false.Quantum Information and Computation, 10(1):97–108, Jan 2010.arXiv: 0709.1266,doi:QIC10.1-2-8.html

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  38. [44]

    Marc Hein, Wolfgang Dür, Jens Eisert, Robert Raussendorf, Maarten Van den Nest, and Hans J. Briegel. Entanglement in graph states and its applications.Quantum computers, algorithms and chaos, 162, Mar 2006.arXiv:quant-ph/0602096,doi: 10.3254/978-1-61499-018-5-115

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  39. [45]

    Graphical description of the action of local Clifford transformations on graph states.Physical Review A, 69(2), Feb 2004.arXiv:quant-ph/0308151,doi:10.1103/physreva.69.022316

    Maarten Van den Nest, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Graphical description of the action of local Clifford transformations on graph states.Physical Review A, 69(2), Feb 2004.arXiv:quant-ph/0308151,doi:10.1103/physreva.69.022316

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  40. [46]

    Normal forms and entanglement measures for multipartite quantum states.Physical Review A, 68:012103, Jul 2003

    Frank Verstraete, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Normal forms and entanglement measures for multipartite quantum states.Physical Review A, 68:012103, Jul 2003. arXiv:quant-ph/0105090,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.68.012103

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  41. [47]

    The LU-LC conjecture, diagonal local op- erations and quadratic forms over GF(2).Quantum Information and Computation, 8(3):263–281, 2008.arXiv:0707.4000,doi:10.26421/QIC8.3-4-3

    David Gross and Maarten Van den Nest. The LU-LC conjecture, diagonal local op- erations and quadratic forms over GF(2).Quantum Information and Computation, 8(3):263–281, 2008.arXiv:0707.4000,doi:10.26421/QIC8.3-4-3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  42. [48]

    Bei Zeng, Andrew Cross, and Isaac L. Chuang. Transversality versus universality for additive quantum codes.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 57(9):6272–6284, 2011.arXiv:0706.1382,doi:10.1109/TIT.2011.2161917

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  43. [49]

    Nikoloz Tsimakuridze and Otfried Gühne. Graph states and local unitary transforma- tions beyond local Clifford operations.Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoret- ical, 50(19):195302, Apr 2017.arXiv:1611.06938,doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa67cd

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  44. [50]

    Isotropic systems.European Journal of Combinatorics, 8(3):231–244, 1987.doi:10.1016/S0195-6698(87)80027-6

    André Bouchet. Isotropic systems.European Journal of Combinatorics, 8(3):231–244, 1987.doi:10.1016/S0195-6698(87)80027-6

    work page doi:10.1016/s0195-6698(87)80027-6 1987

  45. [51]

    Digraph decompositions and Eulerian systems.SIAM Journal on Algebraic Discrete Methods, 8(3):323–337, 1987.doi:10.1137/0608028

    André Bouchet. Digraph decompositions and Eulerian systems.SIAM Journal on Algebraic Discrete Methods, 8(3):323–337, 1987.doi:10.1137/0608028. 113

    work page doi:10.1137/0608028 1987

  46. [52]

    Reducing prime graphs and recognizing circle graphs.Combinatorica, 7(3):243–254, Sep 1987.doi:10.1007/BF02579301

    André Bouchet. Reducing prime graphs and recognizing circle graphs.Combinatorica, 7(3):243–254, Sep 1987.doi:10.1007/BF02579301

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02579301 1987

  47. [53]

    Graphic presentations of isotropic systems.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 45(1):58–76, 1988.doi:10.1016/0095-8956(88)90055-X

    André Bouchet. Graphic presentations of isotropic systems.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 45(1):58–76, 1988.doi:10.1016/0095-8956(88)90055-X

    doi:10.1016/0095-8956(88)90055-x 1988

  48. [54]

    Transforming trees by successive local complementations.Journal of Graph Theory, 12:195–207, 1988.doi:10.1002/jgt.3190120210

    André Bouchet. Transforming trees by successive local complementations.Journal of Graph Theory, 12:195–207, 1988.doi:10.1002/jgt.3190120210

    work page doi:10.1002/jgt.3190120210 1988

  49. [55]

    Connectivity of isotropic systems.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 555(1):81–93, 1989.doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1989.tb22439.x

    André Bouchet. Connectivity of isotropic systems.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 555(1):81–93, 1989.doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1989.tb22439.x

    arXiv 1989

  50. [56]

    An efficient algorithm to recognize locally equivalent graphs.Combi- natorica, 11(4):315–329, Dec 1991.doi:10.1007/BF01275668

    André Bouchet. An efficient algorithm to recognize locally equivalent graphs.Combi- natorica, 11(4):315–329, Dec 1991.doi:10.1007/BF01275668

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01275668 1991

  51. [57]

    Recognizing locally equivalent graphs.Discrete Mathematics, 114(1):75–86, 1993.doi:10.1016/0012-365X(93)90357-Y

    André Bouchet. Recognizing locally equivalent graphs.Discrete Mathematics, 114(1):75–86, 1993.doi:10.1016/0012-365X(93)90357-Y

    work page doi:10.1016/0012-365x(93)90357-y 1993

  52. [58]

    Circle graph obstructions.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 60(1):107–144, 1994.doi:10.1006/jctb.1994.1008

    André Bouchet. Circle graph obstructions.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 60(1):107–144, 1994.doi:10.1006/jctb.1994.1008

    arXiv 1994

  53. [59]

    Multimatroids III

    André Bouchet. Multimatroids III. Tightness and fundamental graphs.European Jour- nal of Combinatorics, 22(5):657–677, 2001.doi:10.1006/eujc.2000.0486

    arXiv 2001

  54. [60]

    Eulerian lines in finite 4-valent graphs and their transformations.Theory of Graphs, pages 219–230, 1968

    Anton Kotzig. Eulerian lines in finite 4-valent graphs and their transformations.Theory of Graphs, pages 219–230, 1968

    1968

  55. [61]

    Quelques remarques sur les transformationsκ, 1977

    Anton Kotzig. Quelques remarques sur les transformationsκ, 1977

    1977

  56. [62]

    Efficient algorithm to recognize the local Clifford equivalence of graph states.Physical Review A, 70:034302, Sep 2004.arXiv:quant-ph/0405023,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.70.034302

    Maarten Van den Nest, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Efficient algorithm to recognize the local Clifford equivalence of graph states.Physical Review A, 70:034302, Sep 2004.arXiv:quant-ph/0405023,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.70.034302

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  57. [63]

    Graph states, pivot minor, and universality of (X,Z)- measurements.International Journal of Unconventional Computing, 9(1-2):153–171, 2013.arXiv:1202.6551

    Mehdi Mhalla and Simon Perdrix. Graph states, pivot minor, and universality of (X,Z)- measurements.International Journal of Unconventional Computing, 9(1-2):153–171, 2013.arXiv:1202.6551

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  58. [64]

    Edge-local equivalence of graphs

    Maarten Van den Nest and Bart De Moor. Edge-local equivalence of graphs. 2005. arXiv:math/0510246

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  59. [65]

    Approximatingclique-widthandbranch-width.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 96(4):514–528, 2006.doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2005

    Sang-ilOumandPaulSeymour. Approximatingclique-widthandbranch-width.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 96(4):514–528, 2006.doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2005. 10.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2005 2006

  60. [66]

    Nielsen and Isaac L

    Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang.Quantum Computation and Quantum Infor- mation. Cambridge University Press, 2000

    2000

  61. [67]

    Rank-width and vertex-minors.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 95(1):79–100, 2005.doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2005.03.003

    Sang-il Oum. Rank-width and vertex-minors.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 95(1):79–100, 2005.doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2005.03.003. 114

    doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2005.03.003 2005

  62. [68]

    D. G. Fon-Der-Flaass. Local complementations of simple and directed graphs. InDis- crete Analysis and Operations Research, 1996.doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1606-7_3

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1606-7_3 1996

  63. [69]

    On the minimum degree up to local complementation: Bounds and complexity

    Jérôme Javelle, Mehdi Mhalla, and Simon Perdrix. On the minimum degree up to local complementation: Bounds and complexity. InProceedings of the 38th workshop on Graph Theory (WG 2012), 2012.arXiv:1204.4564,doi:10.1007/ 978-3-642-34611-8_16

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  64. [70]

    Minimum degree up to local complementa- tion: Bounds, parameterized complexity, and exact algorithms

    David Cattanéo and Simon Perdrix. Minimum degree up to local complementa- tion: Bounds, parameterized complexity, and exact algorithms. InProceedings of the 26th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation, (ISAAC 2015), 2015. arXiv:1503.04702,doi:10.1007/978-3-662-48971-0\_23

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  65. [71]

    Local unitary versus local Clifford equivalence of stabilizer states.Physical Review A, 71(6), Jun 2005.arXiv: quant-ph/0411115,doi:10.1103/physreva.71.062323

    Maarten Van den Nest, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Local unitary versus local Clifford equivalence of stabilizer states.Physical Review A, 71(6), Jun 2005.arXiv: quant-ph/0411115,doi:10.1103/physreva.71.062323

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  66. [72]

    Bunch and John E

    James R. Bunch and John E. Hopcroft. Triangular factorization and inversion by fast matrix multiplication.Mathematics of Computation, 28(125):231–236, Jan 1974.doi: 10.2307/2005828

    work page doi:10.2307/2005828 1974

  67. [73]

    Ibarra, Shlomo Moran, and Roger Hui

    Oscar H. Ibarra, Shlomo Moran, and Roger Hui. A generalization of the fast LUP matrix decomposition algorithm and applications.Journal of Algorithms, 3(1):45–56, 1982.doi:10.1016/0196-6774(82)90007-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0196-6774(82)90007-4 1982

  68. [74]

    Graph states under the action of local Clifford group in non-binary case

    Mohsen Bahramgiri and Salman Beigi. Graph states under the action of local Clifford group in non-binary case. Oct 2006.arXiv:quant-ph/0610267

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  69. [75]

    Non- binary stabilizer codes over finite fields.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52:4892 – 4914, Dec 2006.arXiv:quant-ph/0508070,doi:10.1109/TIT.2006.883612

    Avanti Ketkar, Andreas Klappenecker, Santosh Kumar, and Pradeep Sarvepalli. Non- binary stabilizer codes over finite fields.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52:4892 – 4914, Dec 2006.arXiv:quant-ph/0508070,doi:10.1109/TIT.2006.883612

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  70. [76]

    Access structure in graphs in high dimension and application to secret sharing

    Anne Marin, Damian Markham, and Simon Perdrix. Access structure in graphs in high dimension and application to secret sharing. InProceedings of the 8th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2013), Apr 2013.arXiv:1304.7105,doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.TQC.2013.308

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  71. [77]

    The rank-width of edge-coloured graphs

    Mamadou Kante and Michaël Rao. The rank-width of edge-coloured graphs. Theory of Computing Systems, 52, Sep 2007.arXiv:0709.1433,doi:10.1007/ s00224-012-9399-y

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  72. [78]

    Bei Zeng, Xie Chen, and Isaac L. Chuang. Semi-Clifford operations, structure ofCk hierarchy, and gate complexity for fault-tolerant quantum computation.Physical Review A, 77:042313, Apr 2008.arXiv:0712.2084,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.77.042313

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  73. [79]

    Cui, Daniel Gottesman, and Anirudh Krishna

    Shawn X. Cui, Daniel Gottesman, and Anirudh Krishna. Diagonal gates in the Clifford hierarchy.Physical Review A, 95:012329, Jan 2017.arXiv:1608.06596,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevA.95.012329. 115

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  74. [80]

    Glaudell, Shaun Kelso, William Maxwell, Samuel S

    Matthew Amy, Andrew N. Glaudell, Shaun Kelso, William Maxwell, Samuel S. Mendel- son, and Neil J. Ross. Exact synthesis of multiqubit Clifford-cyclotomic circuits. InProceedings of the 16th Conference on Reversible Computation (RC 2024), 2024. arXiv:2311.07741,doi:10.1007/978-3-031-62076-8_15

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  75. [81]

    Eric M. Rains. Quantum codes of minimum distance two.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 45(1):266–271, 1999.doi:10.1109/18.746807

    doi:10.1109/18.746807 1999

  76. [82]

    Algorithm to verify local equivalence of stabilizer states, 2024.arXiv:2410.03961

    Adam Burchardt, Jarn de Jong, and Lina Vandré. Algorithm to verify local equivalence of stabilizer states, 2024.arXiv:2410.03961

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  77. [83]

    Cam- bridge university press, 1952

    Godfrey Harold Hardy, John Edensor Littlewood, and George Pólya.Inequalities. Cam- bridge university press, 1952

    1952

  78. [84]

    Symmetries and entanglement of stabilizer states.Physical Review A, 101:062302, Jun 2020.arXiv:2001.07106,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevA.101.062302

    Matthias Englbrecht and Barbara Kraus. Symmetries and entanglement of stabilizer states.Physical Review A, 101:062302, Jun 2020.arXiv:2001.07106,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevA.101.062302

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  79. [85]

    PhD thesis, ETH Zurich,

    Arne Storjohann.Algorithms for matrix canonical forms. PhD thesis, ETH Zurich,

  80. [86]

    Local equivalence of complete bipartite and repeater graph states.Phys- ical Review A, 98(3):032305, 2018.arXiv:1805.05968,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.98

    Ilan Tzitrin. Local equivalence of complete bipartite and repeater graph states.Phys- ical Review A, 98(3):032305, 2018.arXiv:1805.05968,doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.98. 032305

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

Showing first 80 references.