Talk:Quantum error correction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is being improved by the Cleanup Taskforce to conform with a higher standard of article quality. It is likely to change frequently until completed. Please see its Cleanup Taskforce page for more details.

Cleanup Taskforce page → Edit | Purge ==Quantum error correction== Quantum error correction has been listed on cleanup for about a year. It needs some minor cleanup, and expert attention to make it readable for non-experts. Kerowyn 00:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC) Assigned to User:HoodedMan/Desk haz (user talk)e 20:49, 24 February 2006 Assigned to User:Stewartadcock/Desk haz (user talk)e 20:54, 24 February 2006 Assigned to User:RJFJR/Desk RJFJR 23:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC) (I'm not an expert but I'll see what I can do)

Would be nice if someone put a more detailed description of Shor's, Steane's, and the 5-qubit codes, as well as possibly Gottesman's stabilizer trickery, together with pretty pictures of quantum circuits. I will try to do that, provided I have enough time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.156.154.50 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 14 January 2005.

Theoretically, I could add a lot of information here and on the articles for the more important codes. I'm not promising anything, though! Melchoir 02:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] General Question

Can a quantum error code of any variety correct the error in a and b of a qubit a |0> + b |1> ? It doesn't appear that any projective measurement will be able to correct an unknown error in "a". For clarity of the subject, this question ought to be addressed in the article by some expert. Cryptonaut 03:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Think of the error as a quantum operation on the original state. Measuring the syndrome collapses this operation into a correctible error. The article actually does, in my opinion, a very good job of explaining this. 71.77.1.215 06:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Approaches Other Than the Stabilizer Formalism?

Right now this topic only seems to mention the stabilizer formalism for correcting quantum errors, which can be a bit misleading. Even if the other approaches to quantum error correction aren't delved into in-depth, it should at least be mentioned that the stabilizer formalism misses some correctable quantum errors that other approaches catch. (As a perfect example, the 3-qubit channel with 3 Kraus Operators Z1, Z2 and Z3 would not give even a single-qubit correctable code under the stabilizer formalism (I think), but actually admits a 2-qubit perfectly correctable code). 131.104.9.166 18:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)