Mostly I'm confused over whether the common convention is to use +$i$ or -$i$ along the anti-diagonal of the middle $2\times 2$ block.


Mostly I'm confused over whether the common convention is to use +i or -i along the anti-diagonal of the middle 2x2 block.

The former. There are two $+i$'s along the anti-diagonal of the middle $2\times 2$ block of the iSWAP gate. See page 95 here[$\dagger$].

enter image description here

[$\dagger$]: Explorations in Computer Science (Quantum Gates) - Colin P. Williams


Whether you use $+i$ or $-i$ is entirely up to you. After all, your definition of $\pm i$ is merely a convention. On the other hand, I think I've only ever seen it with $+i$.

On a more general footing, you can consider that iSWAP is the gate obtained by time-evolving with an XX interaction ($H=-\sigma_x\otimes\sigma_x - \sigma_y\otimes\sigma_y$), in which case it depends on which sign of $i$ in the Schrödinger equation and for the Hamiltonian you prefer. (You get $+i$ if you evolve with $\exp[-iHt]$, $t=\pi/4$, and chose the minus sign in the Hamiltonian as above, i.e. a ferromagnet).

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You're right that if you globally replace +i by -i in every single gate, that all measurement expectations are identical. But typically you'd be combining the iswap with other existing gates that already have a convention (e.g. $S = \text{diag}(1, i)$), in which case the choice of +i vs -i for the iswap has observable consequences. Here's an example circuit with that property. $\endgroup$ – Craig Gidney Jul 4 '18 at 16:43
  • $\begingroup$ @CraigGidney Sure. But then, again, it depends how you define your other gates, such as $Z^{1/2}$, for which different conventions might be used as well. In practice, for gates which come from a time evolution (such as iSWAP) the 2-qubit gates are likely the ones which fix the choice of $i$, since it is typically easy to reverse the sign of one-qubit Hamiltonians but not of two-qubit Hamiltonians. $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch Jul 4 '18 at 16:55
  • $\begingroup$ Mathematically, the operation of conjugating all complex numbers is a non-trivial field automorphism of $\mathbb{C}$ that fixes $\mathbb{R}$. In particular, all measurement expectations remain fixed under this symmetry. There do exist other automorphisms of $\mathbb{C}$, but they are wild... $\endgroup$ – Adam Zalcman Jan 29 at 3:18

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.