Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 71 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 52 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 18 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 15 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 101 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 196 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 467 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Finding resource states of measurement-based quantum computing is harder than quantum computing (1609.00457v1)

Published 2 Sep 2016 in quant-ph, cond-mat.stat-mech, cond-mat.str-el, and cs.CC

Abstract: Measurement-based quantum computing enables universal quantum computing with only adaptive single-qubit measurements on certain many-qubit states, such as the graph state, the Affleck-Kennedy-Lieb-Tasaki (AKLT) state, and several tensor-network states. Finding new resource states of measurement-based quantum computing is a hard task, since for a given state there are exponentially many possible measurement patterns on the state. In this paper, we consider the problem of deciding, for a given state and a set of unitary operators, whether there exists a way of measurement-based quantum computing on the state that can realize all unitaries in the set, or not. We show that the decision problem is QCMA-hard, which means that finding new resource states of measurement-based quantum computing is harder than quantum computing itself (unless BQP is equal to QCMA). We also derive an upperbound of the decision problem: the problem is in a quantum version of the second level of the polynomial hierarchy.

Citations (4)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (1)