The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators
Open accessAbstract
Intuitively, if a density operator has small rank, then it should be easier to estimate from experimental data, since in this case only a few eigenvectors need to be learned. We prove two complementary results that confirm this intuition. Firstly, we show that a low-rank density matrix can be estimated using fewer copies of the state, i.e. the sample complexity of tomography decreases with the rank. Secondly, we show that unknown low-rank states can be reconstructed from an incomplete set of measurements, using techniques from compressed sensing and matrix completion. These techniques use simple Pauli measurements, and their output can be certified without making any assumptions about the unknown state. In this paper, we present a new theoretical analysis of compressed tomography, based on the restricted isometry property for low-rank matrices. Using these tools, we obtain near-optimal error bounds for the realistic situation where the data contain noise due to finite statistics, and the density matrix is full-rank with decaying eigenvalues. We also obtain upper bounds on the sample complexity of compressed tomography, and almost-matching lower bounds on the sample complexity of any procedure using adaptive sequences of Pauli measurements. Using numerical simulations, we compare the performance of two compressed sensing estimators—the matrix Dantzig selector and the matrix Lasso—with standard maximum-likelihood estimation (MLE). We find that, given comparable experimental resources, the compressed sensing estimators consistently produce higher fidelity state reconstructions than MLE. In addition, the use of an incomplete set of measurements leads to faster classical processing with no loss of accuracy. Finally, we show how to certify the accuracy of a low-rank estimate using direct fidelity estimation, and describe a method for compressed quantum process tomography that works for processes with small Kraus rank and requires only Pauli eigenstate preparations and Pauli measurements.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Boyd, S., & Vandenberghe, L. (2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804441 · Cited by 56,601
Elements of Information Theory
Cover, T. M., & Thomas, J. A. (2001) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/0471200611 · Cited by 36,808
Using SeDuMi 1.02, A Matlab toolbox for optimization over symmetric cones
Sturm, J. F. (1999) · Optimization Methods and Software · doi:10.1080/10556789908805766 · Cited by 7,377
A Singular Value Thresholding Algorithm for Matrix Completion
Cai, J.-F., Candès, E. J., & Shen, Z. (2010) · SIAM Journal on Optimization · doi:10.1137/080738970 · Cited by 5,809
Exact Matrix Completion via Convex Optimization
Candès, E. J., & Recht, B. (2009) · Foundations of Computational Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10208-009-9045-5 · Cited by 4,877
Guaranteed Minimum-Rank Solutions of Linear Matrix Equations via Nuclear Norm Minimization
Recht, B., Fazel, M., & Parrilo, P. A. (2010) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/070697835 · Cited by 3,471
Bhatia, R. (1996) · Cited by 2,847
Sparse Approximate Solutions to Linear Systems
Natarajan, B. K. (1995) · SIAM Journal on Computing · doi:10.1137/s0097539792240406 · Cited by 2,783
James, D. F. V., Kwiat, P. G., Munro, W. J., & White, A. G. (2001) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.64.052312 · Cited by 2,176
Smithey, D. T., Beck, M., Raymer, M. G., & Faridani, A. (1993) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.70.1244 · Cited by 1,538
Cited by
Quantum principal component analysis
Lloyd, S., Mohseni, M., & Rebentrost, P. (2014) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/nphys3029 · Cited by 1,385
Quantum information processing with superconducting circuits: a review
Wendin, G. (2017) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aa7e1a · Cited by 890
Multidimensional quantum entanglement with large-scale integrated optics
Wang, J., Paesani, S., Ding, Y., Santagati, R., Skrzypczyk, P., Salavrakos, A., Tura, J., Augusiak, R., Mančinska, L., Bacco, D., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aar7053 · Cited by 816
The randomized measurement toolbox
Elben, A., Flammia, S. T., Huang, H.-Y., Kueng, R., Preskill, J., Vermersch, B., & Zoller, P. (2022) · Nature Reviews Physics · doi:10.1038/s42254-022-00535-2 · Cited by 355
Self-citationOpen-system dynamics of entanglement:a key issues review
Aolita, L., de Melo, F., & Davidovich, L. (2015) · Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) · doi:10.17169/refubium-20820 · Cited by 258
Metadata
- Authors
- Flammia, S. T., Gross, D., Liu, Y.-K., & Eisert, J.
- Venue
- New Journal of Physics
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2012-09-27
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 095022
- ISSN
- 1367-2630 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2140336578
- Cited by
- 358
- References
- 80
- FWCI
- 21.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/1367-2630/14/9/095022
- The paper
- Flammia, S. T., Gross, D., Liu, Y.-K., & Eisert, J. (2012). Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators. New Journal of Physics. https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/9/095022
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.