search

jamievicary / groubit

0 stars 0 forks source link

Decide which functions to actually implement #5

Closed jamievicary closed 7 years ago

jamievicary commented 7 years ago

Tick, CNOT, Swap, ...

jamievicary commented 7 years ago

Desiderata:

Something I'm a bit worried about is that since we don't really have a map from groubits to qubits, what does it even mean to have a good match to real quantum protocols? Can we make this precise?

davidreutter commented 7 years ago

I think Hadamard/Swap and Phase are set. They are standard generators of the Clifford group and have nice graphical representations. Now the situation is a bit different for CZ/Tick and CNOT. The standard generator of the Clifford group is CNOT. But CNOT has two shortcomings: 1) It's less nice in our graphical calculus. 2) It's not symmetric and therefore conceptually harder to implement. I think this is enough reason to prefer CZ/Tick. Is there a standard circuit symbol for CZ?

jamievicary commented 7 years ago

I'm happy with this.

For CZ I guess you could use a 'Z' symbol in a circle, connected with a line to a black dot on the other wire.