In quantum computing, quantum circuits are a common model for visualizing unitary evolution. If I want to represent a unitary $U$ acting on a $2$-qubit state $|00\rangle$ followed by a measurement in the computational basis then I can draw the following picture:

enter image description here

This representation is concise and unambiguous: $U$ is a unitary process, $|00\rangle$ and $U$ are both defined over $2$ qubits, both measurements are applied to single qubits in the computational basis, etc.

Now suppose I want to represent an arbitrary quantum channel $\mathcal{E}: \mathbb{C}^{4 \times 4} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}^{4\times 4}$ (completely positive, trace preserving). What are ways to visualize this (non-unitary) process $\mathcal{E}$ acting on an input $U|\psi\rangle$? I would appreciate suggestions that are used in publications or other main-stream references.

Possible approaches I have considered and their drawbacks:

  • I could just add another "gate" $\mathcal{E}$ to the diagram above, and comment that $\mathcal{E}$ is a CPTP map. But this seems dangerous because $\mathcal{E}$ is represented in the same way as other unitary operators even though it represents a more general quantum process. This violates readers' expectations and could cause confusion. For example:

enter image description here

  • I could define $V$ to be an isometric extension of $\mathcal{E}$ and add an ambiguous number of ancillary qubits so that my operators are still unitary. However this seems like overkill, since I might choose to define $\mathcal{E}$ in terms of Kraus operators and don't to provide the formalism for an isometry for $\mathcal{E}$ for the sole purpose of providing a picture of my process:

enter image description here

  • I could introduce a different style of box to represent $\mathcal{E}$, but this seems non-standard so it might defeat the purpose of providing a clear description of the process $\mathcal{E}$. And its not clear what style of box one should use if they do take this approach. For example:

enter image description here

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think usually people would just operate with density matrices from the start if the overall dynamics is nonunitary. Just replace $|0\rangle\to|0\rangle\!\langle 0|$ etc and you can use essentially the same notation, maybe replacing $U$ with something like $\mathcal E_U$ to indicate a unitary channel rather than a unitary gate $\endgroup$
    – glS
    Commented May 19, 2021 at 19:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you are willing to step away from the standard quantum circuit model you can do a lot with categorical quantum mechanics (eg arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0510032 and lots of other publicly available material from Bob Coecke) $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2021 at 20:58
  • $\begingroup$ The mainstream way is to represent $\mathcal E$ via its purification $V$. $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2021 at 21:37


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.