pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.12749 · v3 · submitted 2025-09-16 · 🪐 quant-ph

RandomMeas.jl: A Julia Package for Randomized Measurements in Quantum Devices

Andreas Elben , Beno\^it Vermersch This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 16:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords randomized measurementsclassical shadowsJulia packagequantum computingentanglement estimationfidelity estimationtensor network simulationquantum information
0
0 comments X

The pith

RandomMeas.jl supplies a full open-source pipeline for randomized measurements on quantum devices.

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

The paper presents RandomMeas.jl as a Julia package that implements randomized measurement protocols for extracting properties of quantum states and processes. It handles the complete sequence starting with creation of measurement settings for actual hardware, moving through optional classical simulation via tensor networks, and ending with estimators that recover expectation values, entanglement measures, and fidelities from the resulting classical data. The package incorporates features for robust and shallow shadows, batch processing, and automatic uncertainty quantification. A sympathetic reader would care because these tools lower the technical barrier to applying the classical shadow method without writing custom code for each step.

Core claim

RandomMeas.jl is a modular, high-performance Julia package that covers the full randomized measurement workflow from generating measurement settings for quantum computers, through optional classical simulation with tensor networks, to a suite of estimators for physical properties based on the classical shadow formalism, including advanced capabilities such as robust and shallow shadow techniques, batch estimators, and built-in statistical uncertainty estimation.

What carries the argument

The randomized measurement workflow built around the classical shadow formalism, realized through composable Julia functions that generate settings, simulate measurements, and compute estimators.

If this is right

  • Users can generate ready-to-use measurement settings for direct deployment on quantum hardware.
  • Classical simulation of randomized measurements becomes possible for larger systems through integrated tensor-network methods.
  • Estimators for expectation values, entanglement, and fidelities can be obtained together with uncertainty bounds from the same post-processing routines.
  • Advanced variants such as robust and shallow shadows are available without requiring separate code implementations.
  • The composable structure supports extension to new protocols by combining existing components.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Adoption of the package could standardize post-processing steps across different experimental groups working with randomized measurements.
  • Linking the package to existing quantum hardware control libraries would allow end-to-end experiments from setting generation to property estimation.
  • Community contributions might add support for additional noise models or new shadow variants not covered in the initial release.
  • The open design invites direct comparison of different estimator variants on the same generated data sets.

Load-bearing premise

The code in the package correctly implements the described generation, simulation, and estimation steps and runs without errors on typical inputs.

What would settle it

Apply the package's entanglement estimator to randomized measurement data from a two-qubit Bell state and check whether the output converges to the known value of 1 within the reported statistical uncertainty.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.12749 by Andreas Elben, Beno\^it Vermersch.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Experimental RM workflow and corresponding organization of the package RandomMeas.jl. (a) Pre￾processing consists in sampling random unitaries, specifying randomized measurement settings, from a prescribed ensemble. During data acquisition random unitaries are implemented on the state (or process) of interest and projective measurements are performed. Classical post-processing predicts a wide range of quan… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Estimating expectation values with RandomMeas.jl . Using a random MPS of N = 50 qubits, bond dimension 2, and randomized measure￾ments with NU = 200, NM = 100, we extract all Pauli observables with support on sites 1 or 4, as described in Sec. 3. The errors bars are obtained following Sec. 3.4, and correspond throughout this manuscript to ±2 esti￾mated standard deviations. arise during post-processing. 2.3… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Estimation of trace moments pk = tr(ρ k ) using the same RM data as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Robust shadow estimation of the purity of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We introduce $\texttt{RandomMeas$.$jl}$, a modular and high-performance open-source software package written in Julia for implementing and analyzing randomized measurement protocols in quantum computing. Randomized measurements provide a powerful framework for extracting properties of quantum states and processes such as expectation values, entanglement, and fidelities using simple experimental procedures combined with classical post-processing, most prominently via the classical shadow formalism. $\texttt{RandomMeas$.$jl}$ covers the full randomized measurement workflow, from the generation of measurement settings for use on a quantum computer, the optional classical simulation of randomized measurements with tensor networks, to a suite of estimators for physical properties based on classical shadows. The package includes advanced features such as robust and shallow shadow techniques, batch estimators, and built-in statistical uncertainty estimation. Its unified, composable design enables the scalable application and further development of randomized measurements protocols across theoretical and experimental contexts.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces RandomMeas.jl, a modular open-source Julia package for randomized measurement protocols in quantum computing. It claims to cover the complete workflow: generation of measurement settings for quantum hardware, optional classical simulation via tensor networks, and a suite of classical-shadow estimators for physical properties (expectation values, entanglement, fidelities), including robust/shallow shadow variants, batch estimators, and built-in statistical uncertainty quantification.

Significance. If the core implementations are correct, the package would provide a valuable, high-performance tool for the quantum information community. Its unified composable design and support for advanced shadow techniques could facilitate scalable application of randomized measurements in both theoretical studies and experimental quantum devices, filling a gap for Julia users in this area.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and package implementation description] The central claim that the package supplies a complete, working pipeline with correctly implemented estimators (reproducing known unbiased estimators for Pauli observables and entanglement witnesses) rests on unverified assertions. The manuscript provides no numerical benchmarks, no comparisons against reference implementations, no test-suite outputs, and no explicit verification that tensor-network contractions or batch estimators match analytic results on small systems. This is load-bearing for the correctness of the core functionality described in the abstract.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the package includes 'built-in statistical uncertainty estimation' but does not specify the concrete methods (e.g., bootstrap resampling versus closed-form variance expressions for shadow estimators).
  2. [Implementation overview] Notation for measurement settings and shadow estimators could be clarified with explicit pseudocode or small-system examples to aid readers unfamiliar with the classical-shadow formalism.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and for recognizing the potential value of RandomMeas.jl to the quantum information community. We address the major comment below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and package implementation description] The central claim that the package supplies a complete, working pipeline with correctly implemented estimators (reproducing known unbiased estimators for Pauli observables and entanglement witnesses) rests on unverified assertions. The manuscript provides no numerical benchmarks, no comparisons against reference implementations, no test-suite outputs, and no explicit verification that tensor-network contractions or batch estimators match analytic results on small systems. This is load-bearing for the correctness of the core functionality described in the abstract.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of explicit numerical verification in the manuscript weakens the central claims regarding correctness. The package repository does contain a test suite and example scripts that perform such checks (including comparisons to analytic results for small systems and cross-validation of tensor-network contractions), but these were not presented or referenced in the manuscript. In the revised version we will add a dedicated validation section that includes: (i) direct comparisons of the implemented Pauli and entanglement-witness estimators against known closed-form expressions on 2- and 3-qubit systems, (ii) numerical benchmarks of batch estimators and shallow/robust shadow variants, (iii) explicit outputs from the package test suite demonstrating agreement within statistical error, and (iv) a brief description of how users can reproduce these checks. We will also add a short paragraph in the abstract and introduction pointing to this new validation material. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: software package description with no derivation chain

full rationale

The manuscript describes the RandomMeas.jl package and its coverage of the randomized measurement workflow, including measurement setting generation, tensor-network simulation, and classical-shadow estimators for properties such as expectation values and entanglement. No new physical predictions, first-principles derivations, or fitted parameters are introduced; the text simply enumerates implemented features that realize previously published protocols. Because there is no claimed derivation that could reduce to its own inputs by construction, no self-definitional steps, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear. The package's correctness is an implementation claim rather than a mathematical reduction, leaving the analysis self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a software package paper focused on implementation of existing randomized measurement protocols rather than a new scientific derivation, so no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5677 in / 1146 out tokens · 35209 ms · 2026-05-18T16:55:43.978056+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 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Entangling Superconducting Qubits via Energy-Selective Local Reservoirs

    quant-ph 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    Programmable energy-selective local reservoirs stabilize entangled single-excitation states in coupled superconducting qubits with fidelity up to 90.8% via parametric driving to readout resonators.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The randomized measurement toolbox

    Andreas Elben, Steven T. Flammia, Hsin- Yuan Huang, Richard Kueng, John Preskill, Benoît Vermersch, and Peter Zoller. “The randomized measurement toolbox”. Nat. Rev. Phys.5, 9–24 (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Predicting Many Properties of a Quantum System from Very Few Measure- ments

    Hsin-Yuan Huang, Richard Kueng, and John Preskill. “Predicting Many Properties of a Quantum System from Very Few Measure- ments”. Nat. Phys.16, 1050–1057 (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Probing entanglement entropy via randomized measurements

    TiffBrydges, AndreasElben, PetarJurcevic, Benoît Vermersch, Christine Maier, Ben P. Lanyon, Peter Zoller, Rainer Blatt, and Christian F. Roos. “Probing entanglement entropy via randomized measurements”. Sci- ence364, 260–263 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Quantum Information Scrambling in a Trapped-Ion Quantum Simulator with Tunable Range Interactions

    Manoj K. Joshi, Andreas Elben, Benoît Ver- mersch, Tiff Brydges, Christine Maier, Pe- ter Zoller, Rainer Blatt, and Christian F. Roos. “Quantum Information Scrambling in a Trapped-Ion Quantum Simulator with Tunable Range Interactions”. Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 240505 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Cross- platform comparison of arbitrary quantum states

    D. Zhu, Z. P. Cian, C. Noel, A. Risinger, D. Biswas, L. Egan, Y. Zhu, A. M. Green, C. Huerta Alderete, N. H. Nguyen, Q. Wang, A. Maksymov, Y. Nam, M. Cetina, N. M. Linke, M. Hafezi, and C. Monroe. “Cross- platform comparison of arbitrary quantum states”. Nature Communications13(2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Observing the Quantum Mpemba Effect in Quan- tum Simulations

    Lata Kh. Joshi, Johannes Franke, Aniket Rath, FilibertoAres, SaraMurciano, Florian Kranzl, Rainer Blatt, Peter Zoller, Benoît Vermersch, Pasquale Calabrese, Christian F. Roos, and Manoj K. Joshi. “Observing the Quantum Mpemba Effect in Quan- tum Simulations”. Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 010402 (2024). 10

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Experimental quantum state measurement with classical shadows

    Ting Zhang, Jinzhao Sun, Xiao-Xu Fang, Xiao-Ming Zhang, Xiao Yuan, and He Lu. “Experimental quantum state measurement with classical shadows”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 200501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Experimental estimation of quantum state properties from classical shadows

    G.I. Struchalin, Ya. A. Zagorovskii, E.V. Kovlakov, S.S. Straupe, and S.P. Kulik. “Experimental estimation of quantum state properties from classical shadows”. PRX Quantum2(2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Realizing topologically ordered states on a quantum processor

    K. J. et al Satzinger. “Realizing topologically ordered states on a quantum processor”. Sci- ence374, 1237–1241 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    Robust Estimation of the Quan- tum Fisher Information on a Quantum Pro- cessor

    VittorioVitale, AniketRath, PetarJurcevic, Andreas Elben, Cyril Branciard, and Benoît Vermersch. “Robust Estimation of the Quan- tum Fisher Information on a Quantum Pro- cessor”. PRX Quantum5, 030338 (2024)

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    Demon- stration of robust and efficient quantum property learning with shallow shadows

    Hong-Ye Hu, Andi Gu, Swarnadeep Ma- jumder, Hang Ren, Yipei Zhang, Derek S. Wang, Yi-Zhuang You, Zlatko Minev, Su- sanne F. Yelin, and Alireza Seif. “Demon- stration of robust and efficient quantum property learning with shallow shadows”. Nat. Comm.16, 2943 (2025)

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Measuring the spectral form factor in many-body chaotic and localized phases of quantum processors

    Hang Dong, Pengfei Zhang, Ceren B. Dağ, Yu Gao, Ning Wang, Jinfeng Deng, Xu Zhang, Jiachen Chen, Shibo Xu, Ke Wang, Yaozu Wu, Chuanyu Zhang, Feitong Jin, Xuhao Zhu, Aosai Zhang, Yiren Zou, Ziqi Tan, Zhengyi Cui, Zitian Zhu, Fan- hao Shen, Tingting Li, Jiarun Zhong, Ze- hang Bao, Hekang Li, Zhen Wang, Qiujiang Guo, Chao Song, Fangli Liu, Amos Chan, Lei Yin...

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Thermalization and criticality on an analogue–digital quantum simulator

    T. I. et al Andersen. “Thermalization and criticality on an analogue–digital quantum simulator”. Nature638, 79–85 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [15]

    Mea- suring Trρnon Single Copies ofρUsing Ran- dom Measurements

    S. J. van Enk and C. W J Beenakker. “Mea- suring Trρnon Single Copies ofρUsing Ran- dom Measurements”. Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 110503 (2012)

    work page 2012

  15. [16]

    Effi- cient and feasible state tomography of quan- tum many-body systems

    M Ohliger, V Nesme, and J Eisert. “Effi- cient and feasible state tomography of quan- tum many-body systems”. New J. Phys.15, 015024 (2013)

    work page 2013

  16. [17]

    Rényi Entropies from Random Quenches in Atomic Hubbard and Spin Models

    Andreas Elben, Benoît Vermersch, Marcello Dalmonte, J. Ignacio Cirac, and Peter Zoller. “Rényi Entropies from Random Quenches in Atomic Hubbard and Spin Models”. Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 050406 (2018)

    work page 2018

  17. [18]

    Statisti- cal correlations between locally randomized measurements: a toolbox for probing en- tanglement in many-body quantum states

    Andreas Elben, Benoît Vermersch, Chris- tian F. Roos, and Peter Zoller. “Statisti- cal correlations between locally randomized measurements: a toolbox for probing en- tanglement in many-body quantum states”. Phys. Rev.A99, 052323 (2019)

    work page 2019

  18. [19]

    Robust shadow esti- mation

    Senrui Chen, Wenjun Yu, Pei Zeng, and Steven T. Flammia. “Robust shadow esti- mation”. PRX Quantum2, 030348 (2021)

    work page 2021

  19. [20]

    Clas- sical Shadows With Noise

    Dax Enshan Koh and Sabee Grewal. “Clas- sical Shadows With Noise”. Quantum6, 776 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [21]

    Classical shadow tomography with lo- cally scrambled quantum dynamics

    Hong-Ye Hu, Soonwon Choi, and Yi-Zhuang You. “Classical shadow tomography with lo- cally scrambled quantum dynamics”. Phys. Rev. Research5, 023027 (2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [22]

    Scalable and Flexible Clas- sical Shadow Tomography with Tensor Net- works

    Ahmed A. Akhtar, Hong-Ye Hu, and Yi- Zhuang You. “Scalable and Flexible Clas- sical Shadow Tomography with Tensor Net- works”. Quantum7, 1026 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [23]

    Shallow shadows: Ex- pectation estimation using low-depth ran- dom clifford circuits

    Christian Bertoni, Jonas Haferkamp, Marcel Hinsche, Marios Ioannou, Jens Eisert, and Hakop Pashayan. “Shallow shadows: Ex- pectation estimation using low-depth ran- dom clifford circuits”. Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 020602 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [24]

    Entan- glement barrier and its symmetry resolution: theory and experiment

    Aniket Rath, Vittorio Vitale, Sara Mur- ciano, Matteo Votto, Jérôme Dubail, Richard Kueng, Cyril Branciard, Pasquale Calabrese, and Benoît Vermersch. “Entan- glement barrier and its symmetry resolution: theory and experiment”. PRX Quantum4, 010318 (2023)

    work page 2023

  24. [25]

    Enhanced estimation of 11 quantum properties with common random- ized measurements

    Benoît Vermersch, Aniket Rath, Bharathan Sundar, Cyril Branciard, John Preskill, and Andreas Elben. “Enhanced estimation of 11 quantum properties with common random- ized measurements”. PRX Quantum5, 010352 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [26]

    Dual- frame optimization for informationally com- plete quantum measurements

    Laurin E. Fischer, Timothée Dao, Ivano Tavernelli, and Francesco Tacchino. “Dual- frame optimization for informationally com- plete quantum measurements”. Phys. Rev. A109, 062415 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [27]

    Classical shadows

    Roeland Wiersema and Brian Doolit- tle. “Classical shadows”.https: //pennylane.ai/qml/demos/tutorial_ classical_shadows(2021). Date Accessed: 2025-07-02

    work page 2021

  27. [28]

    Mitiq: A software package for error mitigation on noisy quantum computers

    Ryan LaRose, Andrea Mari, Sarah Kaiser, Peter J. Karalekas, Andre A. Alves, Piotr Czarnik, Mohamed El Mandouh, Max H. Gordon, Yousef Hindy, Aaron Robert- son, Purva Thakre, Misty Wahl, Danny Samuel, Rahul Mistri, Maxime Tremblay, Nick Gardner, Nathaniel T. Stemen, Nathan Shammah, and William J. Zeng. “Mitiq: A software package for error mitigation on nois...

    work page 2022

  28. [29]

    TensorCir- cuit: a Quantum Software Framework for the NISQ Era

    Shi-Xin Zhang, Jonathan Allcock, Zhou- Quan Wan, Shuo Liu, Jiace Sun, Hao Yu, Xing-Han Yang, Jiezhong Qiu, Zhaofeng Ye, Yu-Qin Chen, Chee-Kong Lee, Yi-Cong Zheng, Shao-Kai Jian, Hong Yao, Chang- Yu Hsieh, and Shengyu Zhang. “TensorCir- cuit: a Quantum Software Framework for the NISQ Era”. Quantum7, 912 (2023)

    work page 2023

  29. [30]

    Paddle Quantum

    “Paddle Quantum” (2020)

    work page 2020

  30. [31]

    Character- izing quantum supremacy in near-term de- vices

    Sergio Boixo, Sergei V. Isakov, Vadim N. Smelyanskiy, Ryan Babbush, Nan Ding, Zhang Jiang, Michael J. Bremner, John M. Martinis, and Hartmut Neven. “Character- izing quantum supremacy in near-term de- vices”. Nat. Phys.14, 595–600 (2018)

    work page 2018

  31. [32]

    The ITensor Soft- ware Library for Tensor Network Calcu- lations

    Matthew Fishman, Steven White, and Ed- win Miles Stoudenmire. “The ITensor Soft- ware Library for Tensor Network Calcu- lations”. SciPost Physics CodebasesPage 004 (2022)

    work page 2022

  32. [33]

    Mixed-State Entanglement from Local Ran- domized Measurements

    Andreas Elben, Richard Kueng, Hsin- Yuan (Robert) Huang, Rick van Bij- nen, Christian Kokail, Marcello Dalmonte, Pasquale Calabrese, Barbara Kraus, John Preskill, Peter Zoller, and Benoît Vermersch. “Mixed-State Entanglement from Local Ran- domized Measurements”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 200501 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [34]

    Cross- Platform Verification of Intermediate Scale Quantum Devices

    Andreas Elben, Benoît Vermersch, Rick van Bijnen, Christian Kokail, Tiff Brydges, Christine Maier, Manoj Joshi, Rainer Blatt, Christian F. Roos, and Peter Zoller. “Cross- Platform Verification of Intermediate Scale Quantum Devices”. Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 010504 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [35]

    Jackknife, bootstrap and other resampling methods in regression anal- ysis

    Chien-Fu Jeff Wu. “Jackknife, bootstrap and other resampling methods in regression anal- ysis”. Ann. Stat.14, 1261–1295 (1986)

    work page 1986

  35. [36]

    Op- erator relaxation and the optimal depth of classical shadows

    Matteo Ippoliti, Yaodong Li, Tibor Rakovszky, and Vedika Khemani. “Op- erator relaxation and the optimal depth of classical shadows”. Physical Review Letters130(2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [37]

    A scalable maximum like- lihood method for quantum state tomogra- phy

    T. Baumgratz, A. Nüßeler, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio. “A scalable maximum like- lihood method for quantum state tomogra- phy”. New J. Phys.15, 125004 (2013)

    work page 2013

  37. [38]

    Character- izing quantum supremacy in near-term de- vices

    Sergio Boixo, Sergei V. Isakov, Vadim N. Smelyanskiy, Ryan Babbush, Nan Ding, Zhang Jiang, Michael J. Bremner, John M. Martinis, and Hartmut Neven. “Character- izing quantum supremacy in near-term de- vices”. Nature Physics14, 595–600 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [39]

    Quantum supremacy us- ingaprogrammablesuperconductingproces- sor

    Frank et al Arute. “Quantum supremacy us- ingaprogrammablesuperconductingproces- sor”. Nature574, 505–510 (2019)

    work page 2019

  39. [40]

    Benchmarking quantum simulators using ergodic quantum dynamics

    Daniel K. Mark, Joonhee Choi, Adam L. Shaw, Manuel Endres, and Soonwon Choi. “Benchmarking quantum simulators using ergodic quantum dynamics”. Physical Re- view Letters131(2023)

    work page 2023

  40. [41]

    Benchmarking highly en- tangled states on a 60-atom analogue quan- tum simulator

    Adam L. Shaw, Zhuo Chen, Joonhee Choi, Daniel K. Mark, Pascal Scholl, Ran Finkel- stein, Andreas Elben, Soonwon Choi, and Manuel Endres. “Benchmarking highly en- tangled states on a 60-atom analogue quan- tum simulator”. Nature628, 71–77 (2024)

    work page 2024

  41. [42]

    One-dimensional many- body entangled open quantum systems with tensor network methods

    Daniel Jaschke, Simone Montangero, and Lincoln D. Carr. “One-dimensional many- body entangled open quantum systems with tensor network methods”. Quantum Science and Technology4, 013001 (2018). 12

    work page 2018

  42. [43]

    Provably efficient machine learning for quantum many-body problems

    Hsin-Yuan Huang, Richard Kueng, Gia- como Torlai, Victor V. Albert, and John Preskill. “Provably efficient machine learning for quantum many-body problems”. Science 377, eabk3333 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [44]

    Improved machine learning algorithm for predicting ground state prop- erties

    Laura Lewis, Hsin-Yuan Huang, Viet T. Tran, Sebastian Lehner, Richard Kueng, and John Preskill. “Improved machine learning algorithm for predicting ground state prop- erties”. Nat. Comm.15, 895 (2024)

    work page 2024

  44. [45]

    Shadow process tomography of quantum channels

    Jonathan Kunjummen, Minh C. Tran, Daniel Carney, and Jacob M. Taylor. “Shadow process tomography of quantum channels”. Phys. Rev.A107, 042403 (2023)

    work page 2023

  45. [46]

    Classical Shadows for Quantum Process To- mography on Near-term Quantum Comput- ers

    Ryan Levy, Di Luo, and Bryan K. Clark. “Classical Shadows for Quantum Process To- mography on Near-term Quantum Comput- ers”. Phys. Rev. Research6, 013029 (2024)

    work page 2024

  46. [47]

    Votto, M

    Matteo Votto, Marko Ljubotina, Cécilia Lancien, J. Ignacio Cirac, Peter Zoller, Maksym Serbyn, Lorenzo Piroli, and Benoît Vermersch. “Learning mixed quantum states in large-scale experiments” (2025). arXiv:2507.12550 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [48]

    Quan- tum process tomography with unsupervised learning and tensor networks

    Giacomo Torlai, Christopher J. Wood, Atithi Acharya, Giuseppe Carleo, Juan Car- rasquilla, and Leandro Aolita. “Quan- tum process tomography with unsupervised learning and tensor networks”. Nat. Comm. 14, 2858 (2023)

    work page 2023

  48. [49]

    Certifying almost all quan- tum states with few single-qubit measure- ments

    Hsin-Yuan Huang, John Preskill, and Mehdi Soleimanifar. “Certifying almost all quan- tum states with few single-qubit measure- ments” (2024). arXiv:2404.07281 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  49. [50]

    Mea- surements of quantum hamiltonians with locally-biased classical shadows

    Charles Hadfield, Sergey Bravyi, Rudy Ray- mond, and Antonio Mezzacapo. “Mea- surements of quantum hamiltonians with locally-biased classical shadows” (2020). arXiv:2006.15788

    work page arXiv 2020

  50. [51]

    Importance sampling of randomized mea- surements for probing entanglement

    Aniket Rath, Rick van Bijnen, Andreas El- ben, Peter Zoller, and Benoît Vermersch. “Importance sampling of randomized mea- surements for probing entanglement”. Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 200503 (2021)

    work page 2021

  51. [52]

    Efficient estimation of pauli ob- servables by derandomization

    Hsin-Yuan Huang, Richard Kueng, and John Preskill. “Efficient estimation of pauli ob- servables by derandomization”. Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 030503 (2021)

    work page 2021

  52. [53]

    Randomized measure- ment protocols for lattice gauge theories

    Jacob Bringewatt, Jonathan Kunjummen, and Niklas Mueller. “Randomized measure- ment protocols for lattice gauge theories”. Quantum8, 1300 (2024)

    work page 2024

  53. [54]

    Group- theoretic error mitigation enabled by classi- cal shadows and symmetries

    Andrew Zhao and Akimasa Miyake. “Group- theoretic error mitigation enabled by classi- cal shadows and symmetries”. npj Quantum Information10(2024)

    work page 2024

  54. [55]

    Clas- sical shadows with symmetries

    Frederic Sauvage and Martin Larocca. “Clas- sical shadows with symmetries” (2024). arXiv:2408.05279

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [56]

    Shadow distilla- tion: Quantum error mitigation with classi- cal shadows for near-term quantum proces- sors

    Alireza Seif, Ze-Pei Cian, Sisi Zhou, Senrui Chen, and Liang Jiang. “Shadow distilla- tion: Quantum error mitigation with classi- cal shadows for near-term quantum proces- sors”. PRX Quantum4, 010303 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [57]

    Error mitigation for short- depth quantum circuits

    Kristan Temme, Sergey Bravyi, and Jay M. Gambetta. “Error mitigation for short- depth quantum circuits”. Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017)

    work page 2017

  57. [58]

    Practical quantum error mitigation for near-future applications

    Suguru Endo, Simon C. Benjamin, and Ying Li. “Practical quantum error mitigation for near-future applications”. Phys. Rev. X8, 031027 (2018)

    work page 2018

  58. [59]

    Quantum error mitigated classical shad- ows

    Hamza Jnane, Jonathan Steinberg, Zhenyu Cai, H. Chau Nguyen, and Bálint Koczor. “Quantum error mitigated classical shad- ows”. PRX Quantum5, 010324 (2024)

    work page 2024

  59. [60]

    Filippov, M

    Sergei Filippov, Matea Leahy, Matteo A. C. Rossi, and Guillermo García-Pérez. “Scalable tensor-network error mitigation for near-term quantum computing” (2023). arXiv:2307.11740 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  60. [61]

    Symmetry-resolved dynamical pu- rification in synthetic quantum matter

    Vittorio Vitale, Andreas Elben, Richard Kueng, Antoine Neven, Jose Carrasco, Bar- bara Kraus, Peter Zoller, Pasquale Cal- abrese, Benoit Vermersch, and Marcello Dal- monte. “Symmetry-resolved dynamical pu- rification in synthetic quantum matter”. Sci- Post Physics12, 106 (2022)

    work page 2022

  61. [62]

    Self-Verifying Variational Quantum Simulation of the Lattice Schwinger Model

    Christian Kokail, Christine Maier, Rick van Bijnen, Tiff Brydges, Manoj K. Joshi, Petar Jurcevic, Christine A. Muschik, Pietro Silvi, Rainer Blatt, Christian F. Roos, and Peter Zoller. “Self-Verifying Variational Quantum Simulation of the Lattice Schwinger Model”. Nature569, 355–360 (2019). 13

    work page 2019

  62. [63]

    Probing Rényi Entanglement En- tropies via Randomized Measurements

    Tiff Brydges, Andreas Elben, Petar Jurcevic, Benoît Vermersch, Chris- tine Maier, Ben P. Lanyon, Peter Zoller, Rainer Blatt, and Christian F. Roos. “Probing Rényi Entanglement En- tropies via Randomized Measurements”. https://zenodo.org/records/2527010 (2018). 14 A Jupyter notebooks for advanced usage This appendix provides the complete list of Jupyter no...

    work page arXiv 2018