Scalable quantum state tomography with artificial neural networks [Blogpost]
Scalable quantum state tomography with artificial neural networks
The curse of dimensionality and its meaning for NISQ devices
The state of a quantum system in its most general form is given by its density matrix
In experimental contexts, one would like to gain information on the prepared quantum state by carrying out measurements that characterize said quantum state. As demanded by the laws of quantum mechanics, these measurements are projective in nature as the post-measurement state must be an eigenstate of the measurement operator. Therefore a single measurement can never be sufficient - without the use of advanced methods, one needs on the order of
With quantum devices growing in size at immense rates, new tools of verification are required to properly assess their working. Here we develop an approach which neither requires exponential experimental data nor exponential computational resources, making our ansatz ‘scalable’.
Probabilistic formulation of quantum mechanics
The measurements we assume to have access to are spin-up and spin-down projections in (randomized)
One can easily check that all
In turn, the knowledge of all expectation values
The role of neural networks
Due to recent developments in the field of Neural Quantum States (NQS) we were motivated to carry out the described task using CNNs.
The task of the CNN is the following: Given a set of samples
Results
We benchmark our approach on various system sizes. For small system sizes in which it is feasible to compare the learned distribution to the exact one, we use the classical fidelity as a performance measure and benchmark it with respect to the fidelity between the maximum likelihood estimate and the exact distribution. If the latter is smaller than the former, we obtain a performance gain by employing the neural network based approach.
For system sizes beyond MLE regimes (at around 10 qubits) we use observables to characterize the quantum state under scrutiny. For both the samples generated from the learned neural network distribution and the ‘bare’ samples used to train the network, we compute Monte Carlo estimates of the observables of interest. If the bare samples constitute estimates that are further off than the neural network generated samples we gain by employing the neural network ansatz and vice versa.
1D TFIM ground states at critical point with PBC
As a first check we employ the proposed scheme for the paradigmatic Ising model in one dimension with periodic boundary conditions at the critical point
These results are summarized in the figure below.
Fig. 1: Left: CNN learns the ground state and its correlations in the paradigmatic 1D Ising model. Various kernel sizes and depths are compared. Right: Slightly altered CNN, which allows for autoregressive sampling, is given the same task. Both methods produce satisfying results and only work well once the model complexity allows to capture all relevant features of the quantum state.
2D TFIM ground states on a lattice
To further investigate the performance, gradually increasing the system complexity, we benchmark the described approach on a 2D TFIM lattice for various coupling strengths. We find that the samples generated using the neural network produce narrower estimates of observables resulting in a decreased root mean square error as compared to the plain dataset. When increasing the number of samples this advantage shrinks until it ultimately vanishes - which is to be expected, as the exactly drawn samples have to approach the exact value in the limit of a large number of samples, while the network will always contain a small bias that hinders this behavior.
Fig. 2: Distribution of samples in observable space (top), their root mean square error (middle) and the described performance measure (bottom) as a function of the sample number for three different observables.
Chain of ions with long range interactions
As a more experimentally motivated example, we study multi-particle correlators in a long range interacting model. Its Hamiltonian is given by
Fig. 3: The multi-particle correlator, its Root Mean Square Error and the associated performance measure as a function of the correlation order n.
Further reading: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.13776