The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Stabilizing quantum information
Open accessAbstract
The dynamical-algebraic structure underlying all the schemes for quantum information stabilization is argued to be fully contained in the reducibility of the operator algebra describing the interaction with the environment of the coding quantum system. This property amounts to the existence of a nontrivial group of symmetries for the global dynamics. We provide a unified framework that allows us to build systematically additional classes of error correcting codes and noiseless subsystems. It is shown that by using symmetrization strategies one can artificially produce noiseless subsystems supporting universal quantum computation.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Indeed, the vanishing of an energy scale for degenerate qubits holds, strictly speaking, only for fully adiabatic techniques, e.g., HQC [53, 54].”
From Internal consistency of fault-tolerant quantum error correction in light of rigorous derivations of the quantum Markovian limit (2006) · cites this paper as [54]
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
Decoherence-Free Subspaces for Quantum Computation
Lidar, D. A., Chuang, I. L., & Whaley, K. B. (1998) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.81.2594 · Cited by 1,818
Dynamical Decoupling of Open Quantum Systems
Viola, L., Knill, E., & Lloyd, S. (1999) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.82.2417 · Cited by 1,808
Dynamical suppression of decoherence in two-state quantum systems
Viola, L., & Lloyd, S. (1998) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.58.2733 · Cited by 1,617
Theory of quantum error-correcting codes
Knill, E., & Laflamme, R. (1997) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.55.900 · Cited by 1,593
Environment-induced superselection rules
Zurek, W. H. (1982) · Physical Review D · doi:10.1103/physrevd.26.1862 · Cited by 1,415
Steane, A. (1998) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/61/2/002 · Cited by 1,391
Zanardi, P., & Rasetti, M. (1997) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.79.3306 · Cited by 1,315
Class of quantum error-correcting codes saturating the quantum Hamming bound
Gottesman, D. (1996) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.54.1862 · Cited by 1,227
Quantum Computation Over Continuous Variables
Lloyd, S., & Braunstein, S. L. (1999) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.82.1784 · Cited by 1,145
Theory of Quantum Error Correction for General Noise
Knill, E., Laflamme, R., & Viola, L. (2000) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.84.2525 · Cited by 866
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- J.F. Cornwell, 1984, Group Theory in Physics
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical
Zurek, W. H. (2003) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.75.715 · Cited by 4,295
Theory of decoherence-free fault-tolerant universal quantum computation
Kempe, J., Bacon, D., Lidar, D. A., & Whaley, K. B. (2001) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.63.042307 · Cited by 550
Schlosshauer, M. (2019) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.10.001 · Cited by 603
Operator quantum error-correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories
Bacon, D. (2006) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.73.012340 · Cited by 486
Beyond the T1 Limit: Singlet Nuclear Spin States in Low Magnetic Fields
Carravetta, M., Johannessen, O. G., & Levitt, M. H. (2004) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.92.153003 · Cited by 388
Metadata
- Authors
- Zanardi, P.
- Venue
- Physical Review A
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2000-12-05
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
- 1050-2947
- 1094-1622
- OpenAlex
- W2032617180
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 16.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Keywords
- quantum error correction, environmental interaction, symmetry groups, noiseless subsystems, symmetrization, universal quantum computation
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
