0
$\begingroup$

I am a little stuck on understanding the measurement probabilities of a 3 qubit system (QCQI q 4.41).

1)H gates are applied to both $q_1$ and $q_2$

2) $C^{(1,2)}_3(X)$, a Toffoli, controlled by $q_1$ and $q_2$ is then applied to $q_3$

3) A Unitary (S gate) is then applied to $q_3$

4) $C^{(1,2)}_3(X)$, a Toffoli, controlled by $q_1$ and $q_2$ is then applied to $q_3$

5) H gates are applied to both $q_1$ and $q_2$

The probability of measuring $|q_1\rangle = |q_2\rangle = 0$ should be $\frac{5}{8}$, however I can only seem to derive $\frac{4}{8}$, by expanding out the tensors and then cancelling.

After step 4 the state I think is:

$(|00\rangle + |01\rangle + |10\rangle)\otimes S|q_3\rangle + |11\rangle \otimes XSX|q_3\rangle$

Then after applying step 5, expanding out and cancelling I am left with:

$(|00\rangle + |00\rangle + |00\rangle - |11\rangle)\otimes S|q_3\rangle + (|00\rangle - |01\rangle - |10\rangle + |11\rangle)\otimes XSX|q_3\rangle $

however I can't seem to find the missing $|00\rangle$, and also in this result the measurement of $|00\rangle$ corresponds to two different states of $q_3$. I think the error in my understanding is somewhere here:

Applying Hs (step 5) and expanding $|11\rangle \otimes XSX|q_3\rangle$

$(H|1\rangle \otimes H|1\rangle) \otimes IXSX|q_3\rangle$ = $(|00\rangle - |01\rangle - |10\rangle + |11\rangle)\otimes XSX|q_3\rangle $

Could it also be my misunderstanding that the state of $|q_1q_2\rangle$ going into both Toffoli gates can be different for step 2 & 4? I was assuming that if that state was $|11\rangle$ in the first Toffoli then it must be $|11\rangle$ into the second as well.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

I'm not sure that I agree with all of your calculation. I agree up to step 4 (but let's be careful and keep normalisation factors in there), $$ \frac{1}{2}(|00\rangle+|01\rangle+|10\rangle)\otimes S|q_3\rangle+|11\rangle\otimes XSX|q_3\rangle, $$ which I would even simplify to $$ \frac{1}{2}(|00\rangle+|01\rangle+|10\rangle)\otimes S|q_3\rangle+|11\rangle\otimes iS^\dagger|q_3\rangle. $$ Now we need to apply the Hadamards $$ \rightarrow\frac{1}{4}(|00\rangle+|01\rangle+|10\rangle+|11\rangle+ |00\rangle-|01\rangle+|10\rangle-|11\rangle+ |00\rangle+|01\rangle-|10\rangle-|11\rangle)\otimes S|q_3\rangle+i\frac{1}{4}(|00\rangle-|01\rangle-|10\rangle+|11\rangle)\otimes S^\dagger|q_3\rangle. $$ Let's simplify the first bracket $$ =\frac{1}{4}(3|00\rangle+|01\rangle+|10\rangle-|11\rangle)\otimes S|q_3\rangle+i\frac{1}{4}(|00\rangle-|01\rangle-|10\rangle+|11\rangle)\otimes S^\dagger|q_3\rangle. $$ So, we can now regroup terms as $$ \frac{1}{4}|00\rangle\otimes(3S+iS^\dagger)|q_3\rangle+\frac{1}{4}(|01\rangle+|10\rangle-|11\rangle)\otimes(S-iS^\dagger)|q_3\rangle. $$ At this point, you might get ahead of yourself and try to read off the amplitude for the $|00\rangle$ term, and determine the measurement probability from that. However, you need to be careful to take into account the normalisation of the state of the third qubit. For example, $$ (S-iS^\dagger)=(1-i)Z=\sqrt{2}e^{-i\pi/4}Z. $$ From this, we conclude that each of the other terms appears with probability $|\sqrt{2}e^{-i\pi/4}/4|^2=1/8$, and applies $Z$ on qubit 3. So, it is clear that the $|00\rangle$ answer must arise with probability 5/8. We just need to check what the rotation is. Let's maipulate it a bit $$ 3S+iS^\dagger=\left(\begin{array}{cc} 3+i & 0 \\ 0 & 3i+1 \end{array}\right). $$ If we write $3+i=\sqrt{10}e^{i\phi}$, then this is $$ \sqrt{10}\left(\begin{array}{cc} e^{i\phi} & 0 \\ 0 & ie^{-i\phi}\end{array}\right)=\sqrt{10}e^{i\pi/4}\left(\begin{array}{cc} e^{i(\phi-\pi/4)} & 0 \\ 0 & ie^{-i(\phi-\pi/4)}\end{array}\right). $$ The $\sqrt{10}$ contributes to the amplitude of the overall state, so we get $|00\rangle$ with probability $|\sqrt{10}e^{i\pi/4}/4|^2$, as required. The unitary is of the form $R_z(\theta)$ with $\theta/2=\pi/4-\phi$. Hence, $$ \cos\theta=\cos\left(\frac{\pi}{2}-2\phi\right)=\sin(2\phi)=\frac{3}{5}. $$

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ thank you so much (again)! this was driving me crazy, lesson learnt not to neglect the normalisation factors!! I also think beforehand I was confusing the concept of global phases and amplitudes, so I thought both could be neglected in calculations! $\endgroup$
    – Sam Palmer
    May 7 '20 at 13:24
  • $\begingroup$ as a side question, QCQI is a great book, but sometimes for self study I find it lacks examples to cement/demonstrate concepts, do you have any other good textbook recommendations to supplement the holes in QCQI? $\endgroup$
    – Sam Palmer
    May 7 '20 at 13:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Aside from the one I'm currently writing?... No, I have to say that N&C is my starting point and then for the classes I teach, I set specific questions to cover what I think is needed. It also depends a lot on what you want and what your background is. If you're into CS/algorithms, I'd go with the Mosca/Kaye/laflamme book but otherwise, I'm not sure. $\endgroup$
    – DaftWullie
    May 7 '20 at 13:35
  • $\begingroup$ can't wait for it to be published!! $\endgroup$
    – Sam Palmer
    May 9 '20 at 17:00
  • $\begingroup$ It'll be a while! $\endgroup$
    – DaftWullie
    May 11 '20 at 8:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.