CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 489Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureCryptography and Data Security

The Heisenberg Representation of Quantum Computers

Open access
Gottesman, Daniel·1998·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9807006arXiv quant-ph/9807006
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Since Shor's discovery of an algorithm to factor numbers on a quantum computer in polynomial time, quantum computation has become a subject of immense interest. Unfortunately, one of the key features of quantum computers - the difficulty of describing them on classical computers - also makes it difficult to describe and understand precisely what can be done with them. A formalism describing the evolution of operators rather than states has proven extremely fruitful in understanding an important class of quantum operations. States used in error correction and certain communication protocols can be described by their stabilizer, a group of tensor products of Pauli matrices. Even this simple group structure is sufficient to allow a rich range of quantum effects, although it falls short of the full power of quantum computation.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9807006

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • If quantum entanglement is not used in a quantum algorithm, the same algorithm can be worked with classical 0 and 1 bits computer systems without any remarkable change in computational speed.

    “It has been demonstrated that if the 'quantum entanglement phenomenon' is not used in the quantum algorithm, then the same algorithm can be worked with classical 0 and 1 bits computer systems without any remarkable change in computational speed.”

    From Quantum Computing in the Next-Generation Computational Biology Landscape: From Protein Folding to Molecular Dynamics (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

    The Discussion and Summary (p. 19) says that circuits restricted to Clifford operations and Pauli measurements can be simulated in polynomial time on a classical computer. It does not make absence of entanglement the condition for that result or establish that the classical version runs at nearly the same speed. The paper also discusses a Bell-state teleportation circuit (Measurements, p. 15), so its classically simulable circuits are not defined by a lack of entanglement. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Quantum entanglement is the cornerstone of quantum calculation speed.

    “The 'quantum entanglement phenomenon' is the cornerstone of quantum calculation speed and pieces of literature are available [21, 22].”

    From Quantum Computing in the Next-Generation Computational Biology Landscape: From Protein Folding to Molecular Dynamics (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

    The paper discusses entangled Bell states in quantum teleportation (Section 7, p. 15), but does not say that entanglement is the cornerstone of quantum computational speed. Its Discussion and Summary (p. 19) instead says that computation is more powerful than classical computation only when it uses gates outside the Clifford group; that does not settle entanglement’s role in the claimed speed advantage. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Colour codes can perform all Clifford gates within a single error correction cycle.

    “Colour codes can perform all Clifford gates38 within a single error correction cycle and support resource-efficient magic state injection protocols required to implement non-Clifford gates21,39,40.”

    From Scaling and logic in the colour code on a superconducting quantum processor (2025) · cites this paper as [38]

    Section 3 (p. 4) identifies gates that generate the Clifford group, and Section 8 (p. 19) discusses Clifford gates in stabilizer codes. Neither passage addresses whether colour codes can perform all Clifford gates within a single error-correction cycle; searches for colour/color codes and that timing claim found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [2][2] Daniel Gottesman, 'A Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation,' Phys. Rev. A 57 , 127 (1998); quant-ph/9702029. - · arXiv
  2. [3][3] Shyamal S. Somaroo, David G. Cory, and Timothy F. Havel, 'Expressing the operations of quantum computing in multiparticle geometric algebra,' Phys. Lett. A 240 , 1 (1998); quant-ph/9801002. - · arXiv
  3. [6][6] P. Shor, 'Fault-tolerant quantum computation,' Proceedings of the 37th Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science , IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 56 (1996); quant-ph/9605011. - · arXiv
  4. [7][7] L. Vaidman, L. Goldenberg, and S. Weisner, 'Error prevention scheme with four particles,' Phys. Rev. A 54 , 1745 (1996); quant-ph/9603031. - · arXiv
  5. [9][9] R. Laflamme, C. Miquel, J. P. Paz, and W. Zurek, 'Perfect quantum error correction code,' Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 , 198 (1996); quant-ph/9602019. - · arXiv
  6. [10][10] C. Bennett, D. DiVincenzo, J. Smolin, and W. Wootters, 'Mixed state entanglement and quantum error correction,' Phys. Rev. A 54 , 3824 (1996); quant-ph/9604024. - · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gottesman, D.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
1998
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9807006
arXiv
quant-ph/9807006
OpenAlex
W1923824182
Cited by
489
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 77 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/assumed-1991-2003/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
Keywords
Clifford+T gate set, T-depth, pre-shared entanglement, communication complexity, blind quantum computation, delegated quantum computation, position verification, quantum foundations, distributed quantum computing

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