Paper detail

Many-body quantum magic

Magic (non-stabilizerness) is a necessary but "expensive" kind of "fuel" to drive universal fault-tolerant quantum computation. To properly study and characterize the origin of quantum "complexity" in computation as well as physics, it is crucial to develop a rigorous understanding of the quantification of magic. Previous studies of magic mostly focused on small systems and largely relied on the discrete Wigner formalism (which is only well behaved in odd prime power dimensions). Here we present an initiatory study of the magic of genuinely many-body quantum states that may be strongly entangled, with focus on the important case of many qubits, at a quantitative level. We first address the basic question of how "magical" a many-body state can be, and show that the maximum magic of an $n$-qubit state is essentially $n$, simultaneously for a range of "good" magic measures. We then show that, in fact, almost all $n$-qubit pure states have magic of nearly $n$. In the quest for explicit, scalable cases of highly entangled states whose magic can be understood, we connect the magic of hypergraph states with the second-order nonlinearity of their underlying Boolean functions. Next, we go on and investigate many-body magic in practical and physical contexts. We first consider a variant of MBQC where the client is restricted to Pauli measurements, in which magic is a necessary feature of the initial "resource" state. We show that $n$-qubit states with nearly $n$ magic, or indeed almost all states, cannot supply nontrivial speedups over classical computers. We then present an example of analyzing the magic of "natural" condensed matter systems of physical interest. We apply the Boolean function techniques to derive explicit bounds on the magic of certain representative 2D SPT states, and comment on possible further connections between magic and the quantum complexity of phases of matter.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.