In general, for a Logical Clifford of a stabilizer code, some physical circuits have many SWAPs while others have none. Some physical circuits have many local Cliffords while others have none. In scirate.com/arxiv/2604.0... my PhD student and I discuss how to navigate this landscape
Despite the way things are often presented, there isn't A [[7,1,3]] Steane Code - there's a ton of them. For each code, there isn't one way to do e.g. a logical Hadamard - there's a ton of ways - and all of them have distinct physical circuits to enact the same logical H @dulwichquantum.bsky.social
We are very happy to share that Grenoble will host TQC, one of the most important quantum computing conferences, in 2027! Excited to welcome the community in the heart of the Alpes!
tqc-conference.org/2026/2027/
Did you know that arXiv is exploring to add Typst? The world's largest preprint archive faces unique challenges to keep science open. Join arXiv veteran Norbert Preining and learn what's ahead for arXiv and Typst.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZl...
I have really come around on typst and now it's painful to switch back to LaTeX for journal submission
6) I'm not really a physicist
Preparing |T> is measuring (X+Y) by synthesizing Controlled_(X+Y) and then measuring the control bit. To take a step back, can you easily prepare the state |Controlled_(C_XYZ)> defined to be Controlled_(C_XYZ)|+>|Phi>, where |Phi> is a Bell State? If so you can Clifford convert that state to |CCZ>
It's a tale as old as time: The "Innovative beverage holdings"/inkjet company to Quantum company pipeline
@nfarina.bsky.social I remember we raised eyebrows about this company on the other site a couple of years ago
Thanks!
Off the top of your head, any idea if quantum communication complexity helps (e.g. reduced expected communication or increased success probability) for this specific problem?
Nice! I'm putting in n=4, k=2, d=2 and leaving everything else blank - no results. Also is H the stabilizer and T the destabilizer?