REVIEW 1 cited by
The axiomatic and the operational approaches to resource theories of magic do not coincide
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
The axiomatic and the operational approaches to resource theories of magic do not coincide
read the original abstract
Stabiliser operations occupy a prominent role in fault-tolerant quantum computing. They are defined operationally: by the use of Clifford gates, Pauli measurements and classical control. These operations can be efficiently simulated on a classical computer, a result which is known as the Gottesman-Knill theorem. However, an additional supply of magic states is enough to promote them to a universal, fault-tolerant model for quantum computing. To quantify the needed resources in terms of magic states, a resource theory of magic has been developed. Stabiliser operations (SO) are considered free within this theory, however they are not the most general class of free operations. From an axiomatic point of view, these are the completely stabiliser-preserving (CSP) channels, defined as those that preserve the convex hull of stabiliser states. It has been an open problem to decide whether these two definitions lead to the same class of operations. In this work, we answer this question in the negative, by constructing an explicit counter-example. This indicates that recently proposed stabiliser-based simulation techniques of CSP maps are strictly more powerful than Gottesman-Knill-like methods. The result is analogous to a well-known fact in entanglement theory, namely that there is a gap between the operationally defined class of local operations and classical communication (LOCC) and the axiomatically defined class of separable channels.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Witness robustness: An operational quantifier of measurement resources via free state discrimination
The witness robustness of a measurement equals the maximum advantage it gives over free measurements in discriminating free-state ensembles, plus one.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.