<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Universal Quantum Computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/quant-ph_0403025/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/quant-ph_0403025/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Universal Quantum Computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas — mentioned by ouid</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33483883</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:quant-ph_0403025:33483883</guid><pubDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2022 17:57:13 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The ability to rotate 45 degrees is equivalent to the construction of a magic state, as you have correctly identified, as it is not a clifford operator, and adding it to your generators gives universal quantum computation on its own. You have pushed the problem sideways. This is the paper, https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0403025, and it is well understood by the paper that the independence of the noisy magic states is necessary for the distillation process to proceed. Note that the probability of having some entanglement between your partial states goes up rather dramatically with the number…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/quant-ph_0403025/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item><item><title>Universal Quantum Computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas — mentioned by ouid</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31728896</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:quant-ph_0403025:31728896</guid><pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2022 17:48:31 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I had a lot of finals, and the answer to this comment that I did not write was essentially accurate. The people who think about computers this way are the people who have to implement them on analog devices, aka the electrical engineers. There is a discrete analog (lol) in the form of coding theory, since it often more practical to make a slightly noisy discrete space and then perform discrete error correction. I was looking at your other comments to see how I should answer you, and I gathered that I can just link you papers. I imagine Von neumann and Hamming and shannon all have something to…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/quant-ph_0403025/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
