<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Approximate Quantum Fourier Transform and Decoherence · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/quant-ph_9601018/</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_9601018/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Approximate Quantum Fourier Transform and Decoherence — mentioned by Strilanc</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45784856</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:quant-ph_9601018:45784856</guid><pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2025 20:02:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; The precision in phase needed to perform an accurate QFT scales EXPONENTIALLY with the number of qubits you&amp;#x27;re trying to transform. This is false. The gates that appear in the textbook QFT circuit (such as the one shown on wikipedia [1]) do mention angles that are exponentially small in N (the number of qubits being operated upon). That may be what&amp;#x27;s confusing you. But it&amp;#x27;s well known that the tolerance on those rotations is high, meaning that simply skipping all the exponentially tiny rotations introduces negligible error [2][3]. Here&amp;#x27;s a simple model. Each time you get a rotation off by…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/quant-ph_9601018/"&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>
