Systematic construction of topological-nontopological hybrid
universal quantum gates
based on many-body Majorana fermion interactions
Motohiko Ezawa
Department of Applied Physics, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Tokyo
113-8656, Japan
Abstract
Topological quantum computation by way of braiding of Majorana fermions is
not universal quantum computation. There are several attempts to make
universal quantum computation by introducing some additional quantum gates
or quantum states. However, there is an embedding problem that -qubit
gates cannot be embedded straightforwardly in qubits for . This
problem is inherent to the Majorana system, where logical qubits are
different from physical qubits because braiding operations preserve the
fermion parity. By introducing -body interactions of Majorana fermions,
topological-nontopological hybrid universal quantum computation is shown to
be possible. Especially, we make a systematic construction of the CnZ
gate, CnNOT gate and the CnSWAP gate.
A quantum computer is a promising next generation computer[1, 2, 3]. In order to execute any quantum algorithms,
universal quantum computation is necessary[4, 5, 6].
There are various approaches to realize universal computation including
superconductors[7], photonic systems[8], quantum dots[9], trapped ions[10] and nuclear magnetic resonance[11, 12]. The Solovay-Kitaev theorem dictates that only the Hadamard
gate, the phase-shift gate and the CNOT gate are enough for
universal quantum computation. These one and two-qubit quantum gates can be
embedded to larger qubits straightforwardly in these approaches.
Braiding of Majorana fermions is the most promising method for topological
quantum computation[13, 14, 15, 16, 17]. There are
various approaches to materialize Majorana fermions such as fractional
quantum Hall effects[18, 19, 16, 20], topological
superconductors[21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27] and Kitaev
spin liquids[28, 29]. However, it can generate only a part of
Clifford gate[30, 31]. The entire Clifford gates are generated for
two qubits but not for more than three qubits[31]. Furthermore, only
the Clifford gates are not enough to exceed classical computers, which is
known as the Gottesman-Knill theorem[32, 33, 34].
There are several attempts to make universal quantum computation based on
Majorana fermions[30, 20, 35, 36, 24, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41]. In the
Majorana system, it is necessary to construct logical qubits from physical
qubits by taking a parity definite basis, because braiding preserves the
fermion parity. It makes logical qubits nonlocal. It is a nontrivial problem
to embed a nonlocal -qubit quantum gate in the -qubit system with . Hence, even if the Hadamard gate, the phase-shift gate and the
CNOT gate are constructed, it is not enough for universal quantum
computation in the -qubit system unless this embedding problem is
resolved.
In this paper, we systematically construct various quantum gates for
universal quantum computation by introducing -body interactions of
Majorana fermions preserving the fermion parity. We have required the
fermion parity preservation because it is beneficial to use the standard
braiding process as much as possible due to its topological protection. By
combining topological quantum gates generated by braiding and additional
quantum gates generated by many-body interactions of Majorana fermions,
topological-nontopological hybrid universal quantum computation is possible.
It would be more robust than conventional universal quantum computation
because the quantum gates generated by braiding are topologically protected.
We systematically construct arbitrary Cn-phase shift gates, the
Hadamard gate, CnNOT gates and CnSWAP gates in the -qubit
system by this generalization.
Supplementary Materials are prepared for detailed analysis in the case of
small qubits to make clear a general analysis for the -qubit system.
Physical qubits and logical qubits: Majorana fermions are described
by operators satisfying the anticommutation relations
with or , where ordinary fermion operators are
constructed from two Majorana fermions as
(4)
Majorana fermions constitute physical qubits.
The braiding operation preserves the fermion parity , where it commutes with the braid
operator ,
(5)
It means that if we start with the even parity state , the states after any braiding process
should have even fermion parity. Therefore, in order to construct
logical qubits , physical qubits are necessary[42, 43, 44]. There are correspondences
between the logical and physical qubits in general. However, we adopt the
following unique correspondence. When the logical qubit is given, we
associate to it a physical qubit by adding one qubit
uniquely so that mod . Alternatively,
when a physical qubit is given, we associate to it a logical qubit just by eliminating
the qubit . An example reads as follows,
(6)
This correspondence is different from those in the previous works[13, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47]. Accordingly, the
detailed braiding process for quantum gates are slightly different from the
previous ones[43, 44, 45, 46, 47].
-body interactions:
A generic operator involving two Majorana fermions and is expressed as ,
since higher-order terms are
absent for and because of the relations . Then, by imposing the parity conservation
condition with the
fermion-parity operator ,
it is restricted to . Furthermore, the unitary condition leads to the
representation of in the form of
(7)
(8)
The choice corresponds to the braiding operation. In
general, can take an arbitrary value.
This operator transforms the Majorana operators as
(9)
We show that non-Clifford gates are constructed based on them.
The two-body operation is realized by the unitary dynamics,
(10)
with
(11)
The four-body operation
(12)
is introduced[13] as an essential ingredient of universal quantum
computation. We generalize it to the four-body operation
defined by
It is realized by the -body interaction of Majorana fermions
(22)
physical qubits: We consider the Majorana fermion system.
The explicit actions on physical qubits are given by
(23)
for odd numbers and
(24)
for even numbers, where we have defined the rotation along the axis by
(25)
and
(26)
logical qubits: logical qubits are constructed from
physical qubits based on the correspondence (6).
Local rotation is possible for any qubits as in
(27)
Local rotation is possible for any qubits as in
(28)
where we have defined the rotation along the axis by
(29)
and .
Accordingly, the Hadamard gate is embedded in arbitrary qubits by using
the decomposition formula,
(30)
Next, we show that it is possible to construct any diagonal
operators based on many-body Majorana interactions, and hence, an arbitrary Cn-phase-shift gate is constructed. By applying the Hadamard gate, it is
possible to construct the CnNOT gate. There are patterns of
-body unitary evolutions in physical qubits. By taking a sum, we
have independent physical qubits. They produce independent logical qubits because there are complementary
operators and which produce the same logical
qubits. The complementary operators are denoted as
(31)
where indicates a set of indices which is the
complementary set of in the indices . For example, we
consider the case for four qubits , where eight Majorana fermions
exists. The following different braiding operators and give an identical logical quantum gate
(32)
where and with . See the full
list of the complementary braiding operators for four physical qubits in Eq.(S143) in Supplementary Material.
There are independent components in logical qubits. On the
other hand, there are independent many-body Majorana operators.
Hence, it is possible to construct arbitrary diagonal operators by solving
the linear equation. They include the Cn-phase shift gates. Using the
relation
(33)
with , the Cn-phase shift gate is constructed as
(34)
where contains odd number of
operators for logical qubits, while contains
even number of operators for logical qubits. By setting , we obtain the CnZ gate.
For example, the CZ gate in three qubits are embedded as
(35)
where indicates that the controlloed qubit
is and the target qubit is . The CC phase-shift gate acting on
three logical qubits in given by
(36)
Especially, the CCZ gate is constructed as follows,
(37)
The Toffoli gate is constructed by applying the Hadamard gate to the CCZ
gate as in
(38)
See Fig.1(a1). The Fredkin gate is constructed by sequential
applications of three Toffoli gates as in
(39)
where indicates that the
controlloed qubits are and while the target qubit is . See Fig.1(b1).
The CnNOT gate is constructed from CnZ gate as
(40)
where the Hadamard gate is applied to th qubit. See Fig.1(a2).
The CnSWAP gate is constructed from the CnZ gate as
(41)
where indicates
that the target qubit is and the others are controlled qubits, where indicates the complementary qubits of the qubit . See Fig.1(b2).
Figure 1: (a1) Construction of the CCNOT gate from the CCZ gate and the
Hadamard gates. (a2) Construction of the CnNOT gate from the CnZ
gate and the Hadamard gates. (b1) Construction of the Fredkin gate from
three Toffoli gates. (b2) Construction of the CnSWAP gate from the CnNOT gates.
As a result, an arbitrary phase-shift gate, the CnNOT gate and the
Hadamard gate are constructed in any logical qubits, and hence, the
universal quantum computation is possible based on many-body interactions.
Discussions: We have analyzed the embedding problem inherent to the
Majorana system, and shown that universal quantum computation is possible by
introducing many-body interactions of Majorana fermions. Especially, the Cn-phase shift gate, the CnNOT and the CnSWAP gate are
systematically constructed, which are the basic ingredients of universal
quantum computation based on the Solovay-Kitaev theorem. Although it was
previously pointed out that four-body interactions of Majorana fermions are
enough for universal quantum computation[13], we have shown that the
four-body interactions are not enough but -body interactions are
necessary.
The proposed quantum gates based on many-body interactions of Majorana
fermions are not topologically protected because they are not generated by
the standard braiding operations. By combining topological quantum
computation based on braiding of Majorana fermions and nontopological
quantum computation based on many-body interaction of Majorana fermions,
topological-nontopological hybrid universal quantum computation is possible.
It would be more robust than conventional universal quantum computation
because many of quantum gates generated by braiding are topologically
protected.
Recently, quantum simulation on Majorana fermions is studied in
superconducting qubits[48, 49, 50]. It will be possible to
realize many-body interactions of Majorana fermions in near future.
This work is supported by CREST, JST (Grants No. JPMJCR20T2) and
Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research from MEXT KAKENHI (Grant No.
23H00171).
References
[1] R. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Int. J.
Theor. Phys. 21, 467 (1982).
[2] D. P. DiVincenzo, Quantum Computation, Science 270,
255 (1995).
[3] M. Nielsen and I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum
Information, Cambridge University Press, (2016); ISBN 978-1-107-00217-3.
[4] D. Deutsch, Quantum Theory, the Church-Turing Principle
and the Universal Quantum Computer, Proceedings of the Royal Society A.
400, 97 (1985).
[5] C. M. Dawson and M. A. Nielsen, The Solovay-Kitaev
algorithm, Quantum Information and Computation 6, 81 (2006).
[6] M. Nielsen and I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and
Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (2010).
[7] Y. Nakamura, Yu. A. Pashkin and J. S. Tsai, Coherent
control of macroscopic quantum states in a single-Cooper-pair box, Nature
398, 786 (1999).
[8] E. Knill, R. Laflamme and G. J. Milburn, A scheme for
efficient quantum computation with linear optics, Nature, 409, 46
(2001).
[9] D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, Quantum computation with
quantum dots, Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998).
[10] J. I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Quantum computations with cold
trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4091 (1995).
[11] L. M.K. Vandersypen, M. Steffen, G. Breyta, C. S. Yannoni,
M. H. Sherwood, I. L. Chuang, Experimental realization of Shor’s quantum
factoring algorithm using nuclear magnetic resonance, Nature 414,
883 (2001).
[12] B. E. Kane, Nature A silicon-based nuclear spin quantum
computer, 393, 133 (1998).
[13] S. B. Bravyi and A. Yu. Kitaev, Fermionic Quantum
Computation, Annals of Physics 298, 210 (2002)
[14] D. A. Ivanov, Non-Abelian statistics of half-quantum
vortices in p-wave superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 268 (2001).
[15] A. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons,
Ann. Phys. 303, 2 (2003).
[16] S. Das Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Topologically
protected qubits from a possible non-Abelian fractional quantum Hall state,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 166802 (2005).
[17] C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das
Sarma, Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation, Rev. Mod.
Phys. 80, 1083 (2008).
[18] N. Read and D. Green, Paired states of fermions in two
dimensions with breaking of parity and time-reversal symmetries and the
fractional quantum Hall effect, Phys. Rev. B 61, 10267 (2000).
[19] N. Read, Non-Abelian braid statistics versus projective
permutation statistics, J. Math. Phys. 44, 558 (2003).
[20] M. Freedman, C. Nayak and K. Walker, Towards universal
topological quantum computation in the fractional quantum Hall
state, Phys. Rev. B 73, 245307 (2006).
[22] M. Sato and Y. Ando, Topological superconductors: a review,
Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 076501 (2017).
[23] S.R. Elliott and M. Franz, Majorana fermions in nuclear,
particle, and solid-state physics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 137 (2015).
[24] S. Das Sarma, M. Freedman and C. Nayak, Majorana Zero Modes
and Topological Quantum Computation, npj Quantum Information 1, 15001 (2015).
[25] J. Alicea, Y. Oreg, G. Refael, F. von Oppen and M.P.A.
Fisher, Non-Abelian statistics and topological quantum information
processing in 1D wire networks, Nat. Phys. 7, 412 (2011).
[26] J. Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of Majorana
fermions in solid state systems, Rep. Prog. Phys. 75, 076501 (2012).
[27] C. W.J. Beenakker, Search for Majorana fermions in
superconductors, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 4, 113 (2013).
[28] A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond,
Annals of Physics 321, 2 (2006).
[29] Y. Kasahara, T. Ohnishi, Y. Mizukami, O. Tanaka, Sixiao
Ma, K. Sugii, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, T. Shibauchi, Y.
Matsuda, Majorana quantization and half-integer thermal quantum Hall effect
in a Kitaev spin liquid, Nature 559, 227 (2018).
[30] S. Bravyi, A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computation with
ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A 71, 022316 (2005).
[31] A. Ahlbrecht, L. S. Georgiev and R. F. Werner, Implementation
of Clifford gates in the Ising-anyon topological quantum computer, Phys.
Rev. A 79, 032311 (2009).
[32] D. Gottesman, Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error
Correction, quant-ph/9705052;
[33] D. Gottesman, The Heisenberg Representation of Quantum
Computers, quant-ph/9807006.
[34] S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simulation of
stabilizer circuits, Phys. Rev. A 70, 052328 (2004).
[35] Universal quantum computation with the =5/2
fractional quantum Hall state, Phys. Rev. A 73, 042313 (2006).
[36] J. D. Sau, S. Tewari and S. Das Sarma, Universal quantum
computation in a semiconductor quantum wire network, Phys. Rev. A 82, 052322
(2010)
[37] T. E. O’Brien, P. Rożek, A. R. Akhmerov, Majorana-based
fermionic quantum computation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 220504 (2018).
[38] P. Bonderson, S. Das Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, A
Blueprint for a Topologically Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computer,
arXiv:1003.2856.
[39] P. Bonderson, L. Fidkowski, M. Freedman, and K. Walker,
Twisted Interferometry, arXiv:1306.2379.
[40] M. Barkeshli and J. D. Sau, Physical Architecture for a
Universal Topological Quantum Computer based on a Network of Majorana
Nanowires, arXiv:1509.07135
[41] Torsten Karzig, Yuval Oreg, Gil Refael, and Michael H.
Freedman Phys. Rev. X 6, 031019 (2016).
[42] C. Nayak and F. Wilczek, -quasihole states
realize -dimensional spinor braiding statistics in paired quantum
Hall states, Nucl. Phys. B 479, 529 (1996).
[43] L. S. Georgiev, Computational equivalence of the two
inequivalent spinor representations of the braid group in the Ising
topological quantum computer, J. Stat. Mech. P12013 (2009)
[44] L. S. Georgiev, Ultimate braid-group generators for
coordinate exchanges of Ising anyons from the multi-anyon Pfaffian
wavefunctions, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 42, 225203 (2009).
[45] L. S. Georgiev, Topologically protected gates for
quantum computation with non-Abelian anyons in the Pfaffian quantum Hall
state, Phys. Rev. B 74, 235112 (2006).
[46] L. S. Georgiev, Towards a universal set of
topologically protected gates for quantum computation with Pfaffian qubits,
Nucl. Phys. B 789, 552 (2008).
[47] C. V. Kraus, P. Zoller and M. A. Baranov, Braiding of atomic
Majorana fermions in wire networks and implementation of the Deutsch-Jozsa
algorithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 203001 (2013).
[48] Huang, et.al. Emulating Quantum Teleportation of a Majorana
Zero Mode Qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 090502 (2021).
[49] Nikhil Harle, Oles Shtanko and Ramis Movassagh, Observing
and braiding topological Majorana modes on programmable quantum simulators,
Nature Communications 14, 2286 (2023).
[50] M. J. Rancic, Exactly solving the Kitaev chain and
generating Majorana zero modes out of noisy qubits, Scientific Reports
volume 12, 19882 (2022).
Supplemental Material
Systematic construction of topological-nontopological hybrid
universal quantum gates
based on many-body Majorana fermion interactions
Motohiko Ezawa
Department of Applied Physics, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Tokyo
113-8656, Japan
I Results on conventional braiding
S1 Embedding
We consider a one-dimensional chain of Majorana fermions and only consider
the braiding between adjacent Majorana fermions. We denote . The braid operators satisfies the Artin braid group relation[1]
(S1)
The embedding of an -qubit quantum gate to an -qubit system with
is a nontrivial problem in braiding of Majorana fermions. There are two
partial solutions. One is setting additional qubits to be as ancilla
qubits, where every quantum gates can be embedded. The other is not to use
the braiding . We discuss both of these in what follows.
S1.1 Ancilla embedding
logical qubits are embedded in logical qubits if the additional
qubit is ,
(S2)
This is because the correspondence between the physical and logical qubits
are identical if the -th qubit is . It is assured by the fact that we
can use the same even parity basis in qubits because the th qubit
is . On the other hand, the action is different if the additional qubit
is ,
(S3)
This is because it is necessary to use the odd parity basis in physical
qubits so that total parity is even in the presence of the th qubit. It
is still useful because there are many quantum algorithms where ancilla
qubits are .
S1.2 Braid construction
We study what -qubit quantum gates can be embedded to an -qubit
quantum gate with . First, we examine the case for one logical qubit as
a simplest example. The braiding acts differently on the
even and odd bases,
(S4)
where
(S5)
On the other hand, and act on even and
odd bases in the same way,
(S6)
Similarly, for has the same action on the even
and odd bases. We find that embedding is possible if we do not use the
braiding . Hence, all of the Pauli gates, the Hadamard
transformation, the SWAP gate can be embedded to the -qubit quantum
gates.
On the other hand, the quantum gates which use braiding
cannot be embedded to larger qubit as it is. For example, the CZ gate is
given by the braiding , whose matrix representation is
(S7)
once it is embedded to three logical qubits. They are different,
(S8)
In general, -quantum gates cannot be embedded in qubit. We solve the
problem by introducing many-body interaction of Majorana fermions in Eq.(35).
S2 Single logical qubit
We discuss how to construct single logical qubit[2]. Two ordinary
fermions and are introduced from four Majorana fermions as
(S9)
The basis of physical qubits is given by
(S10)
By taking the even parity basis as
(S11)
single logical qubit is constructed from two physical qubits.
S3 Quantum gates for one logical qubit
The braid operator is written in terms of fermion
operators,
The even cat state is made by applying the Hadamard gate (S30) as
(S32)
However, a double braiding is enough for the construction of the even cat
state ,
(S33)
On the other hand, the odd cat state is made as
(S34)
Only 6 states can be constructed by braiding in one qubit. The state is constructed by single braiding, while
the states and are constructed by double braiding. No
further states can be constructed by further braiding.
S5 Two logical qubits
In order to construct two logical qubits, we use six Majorana fermions , , , , and
. Three ordinary fermion operators are given by
(S35)
The basis of phycial qubits are given by
(S36)
The explicit braid operators on the physical qubits are
(S37)
Two logical qubits are constructed from three physical qubits as
(S38)
In the logical qubit basis, the braiding operators are
(S39)
where is defined by (S21) and is defined by (S20).
Figure S2: The braiding process for Pauli gates. (a) Pauli Z gate embedded to
the first qubit, (b) Pauli Z gate embedded to the second qubit, (c) Two
Pauli Z gates are embedded to the first and the second qubits, (d) Pauli X
gate embedded to the first qubit, (e) Two Pauli X gates are embedded to the
first and the second qubits, (f) Hadamard gate embedded to the first qubit
and (g) Hadamard gate embedded to the second qubit.
S6 Pauli gates
The two-qubit Pauli gates are defined by
(S40)
where and take and . The Pauli Z gates are
generated by braiding with odd indices,
(S41)
They are summarized as
(S42)
where and take or .
The Pauli X gates are generated by braiding with even indices ,
(S43)
It should be noted that does not generate but generate . We show the braiding for Pauli gates in Fig.S2.
Pauli Y gates are generated by sequential applications of Pauli X gates and
Pauli Z gates based on the relation . Thus, all of Pauli gates for two qubits can be generated by braiding.
S7 Hadamard gates
The Hadamard gate acting on the first qubit can be embedded as
(S44)
The Hadamard gate acting on the second qubit can be embedded as
(S45)
It requires more braiding than the previous results[6, 5], where three braiding are enough. It is due to the choice of the
correspondence between the physical and logical qubits.
See Fig.S3(i). It is different from the cross product of the
Hadamard gates
(S66)
We note that it is obtained by a permutation of the third and fourth columns
of the cross product of the Hadamard gates given by
(S67)
which leads to a relation
(S68)
Hence, it is realized by
(S69)
Both and are the Hadamard gates and they are useful for various quantum algorithms.
S9 Equal-coefficient states
The equal-coefficient state is constructed as
(S70)
where is a
decimal representation of qubits. It is a fundamental entangled state for
two qubits.
S10 Three logical qubits
We use eight Majorana fermions in order to construct three logical qubits,
(S71)
The explicit braid actions on the physical qubits are
(S72)
Three logical qubits are constructed from four physical qubits as
(S73)
Explicit matrix representations for the braiding operator are
(S74)
S11 Pauli gates
The three-qubit Pauli gates are defined by
(S75)
where , and take and . The Pauli Z gates
are generated by braiding operators with odd indices
(S76)
They are summarized as
(S77)
where and take or .
Figure S4: Pauli gates embedded in three qubits. (a) Pauli Z gate embedded to
the first qubit, (b) Pauli Z gate embedded to the second qubit, (c) Pauli Z
gate embedded to the third qubit, (d) Pauli X gate embedded to the first
qubit, (e) Two Pauli X gates are embedded to the first and second qubits and
(f) Two Pauli X gates are embedded to the second third qubits.
The Pauli X gates are generated by braiding operators with even numbers,
(S78)
We show the corresponding braiding in Fig.S4. It is
impossible to construct logical gates corresponding to
(S79)
solely by braiding. This problem is solved by introducing many-body
interactions of Majorana fermions as in Eq.(S142).
The other Pauli gates can be generated by sequential applications of the
above Pauli gates.
S12 Diagonal braiding
We first search braiding operators for the quantum gates generated by odd
double braiding,
(S80)
There are eight patterns represented by the Pauli Z gates
(S81)
Next, we search real and diagonal gates obtained by the following odd
braiding
(S82)
We search states whose components are . There are four additional
quantum gates, whose traces are zero Tr,
(S83)
In addition, there are additional quantum gates, whose traces are nonzero Tr,
(S84)
It is natural to anticipate that the CZ gate and the CCZ gate are generated
by even braiding because they are diagonal gates. However, this is not the
case by checking all patterns of braiding. As a result, the even
braiding do not generate the CZ gates
(S85)
and the CCZ gate
(S86)
This problem is solved by introducing many-body interactions of Majorana
fermions as shown in the main text.
S13 Hadamard gates
The Hadamard gate can be embedded in the first qubit as
(S87)
as in the case of (S44). We also find that the Hadamard gate can be
embedded in the third qubit as
(S88)
On the other hand, it is very hard to embed the Hadamard gate in the second
qubit . It is possible by
introducing many-body interactions of Majorana fermions. The Hadamard gate
for the -th qubit is given by
(S89)
S14 Two-qubit quantum gates embedded in three-qubit quantum gates
The SWAP gate can be embedded to a three-qubit topological gate because
it does not involve and is given by
(S90)
See Fig.S5(a). We also find the SWAP gate can be embedded as
We find that the three-qubit Hadamard transformation is generated as
(S92)
See Fig.S5(b). It is different from the cross-product of the
Hadamard gate
(S93)
There is a relation
(S94)
where is defined by
(S95)
It is impossible to generate the W state by braiding
(S96)
because the number of the nonzero terms of the W state is 3, which
contradicts the fact that the number of the nonzero terms must be , , and for three qubit states generated by braiding.
Figure S5: (a) and (b) SWAP gate embedded to three qubit systems. (c)
Three-qubit Hadamard transformation.
S16 logical qubits
The braid representation of Majorana fermions is equivalent to the rotation in SO, suggested by the fact that
braid operators are represented by the Gamma matrices[12, 13]. The number of the braid group is given by[14]
(S97)
The SWAP gate is embedded as
(S98)
S16.1 Diagonal braiding
We consider odd braiding defined by
(S99)
where is an integer satisfying . They are
Abelian braiding because there are no adjacent braiding. Then, there are
only patterns. Especially, we consider odd double braiding defined by
(S100)
are interesting because they are identical to
(S101)
where . Namely, every Pauli gates constructing from the Pauli Z
gate can be generated.
Next, we consider even braiding defined by
(S102)
They are also the Abelian braiding, where each braiding commutes each other.
We also consider even double braiding defined by
(S103)
On the other hand, it is impossible to construct the Pauli X gate except for
the first qubit. See Eq.(24) in the main text.
S16.2 Hadamard transformation
The Hadamard transformation is used for the initial process of various
quantum algorithm such as the Kitaev phase estimation algorithm, the Deutsch algorithm, the Deutsch-Jozsa
algorithm, the Simon algorithm, the
Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm, the Grover algorithm
and the Shor algorithm. It is generated by the braiding
(S104)
The equal-coefficient state is generated as
(S105)
where is the decimal
representation of the qubit.
II -body unitary evolution
S1 Quantum gates for one logical qubit
The -body Majorana operator is
written in terms of fermion operators,
In the even parity basis, the action is the same as (S108),
(S119)
The rotation along the axis defined by
(S120)
is realized by the sequential operations
(S121)
S2 Three physical qubits
Next, we study the six Majorana fermion system. The explicit actions on the
physical qubits are
(S122)
S3 Two logical qubits
Two logical qubits are constructed from three physical qubits by taking the
even parity basis. The action of to
the logical qubit is
(S123)
which is identical to the ZZ interaction
(S124)
with
(S125)
The action of to the logical qubit is
(S126)
which is identical to the xx interaction
(S127)
with
(S128)
The action of and to the logical qubit is
(S129)
The action of to the logical qubit is
(S130)
which is rewritten in the form of
(S131)
S4 Controlled phase-shift gate
We find
(S132)
The controlled phase-shift gate with arbitrary phase is constructed by
setting ,
(S133)
Especially, the CZ gate is constructed by setting
S5 Controlled-unitary gate
It is known that the controlled unitary gate is constructed as[22]
(S134)
with
(S135)
because
(S136)
and
(S137)
In the Majorana system, the basic rotations are not along the axis but
the axis. The similar decomposition is possible only by using the
rotations along the and axes as
(S138)
The proof is similar. First, we have
where we have used the relation
(S139)
for and . Next, we have
where we have used the relation
(S140)
Hence, the controlled unitary gate is implemented by -body Majorana
interaction.
S6 Four physical qubits
We consider eight Majorana fermion system The explicit actions on four
physical qubits are given by
(S141)
We summarize results on constructing full set of Pauli Z gate for three
logical qubits in the following table:
4 physical qubits
3 logical qubits
(S142)
We have the identical logical qubits:
(S143)
S7 Three logical qubits
Three logical qubits are constructed from four physical qubits by taking the
even parity basis.
(S144)
We find that controlled-controlled phase shift gate cannot be implemented
only by diagonal braiding. It is proved by counting the number of the
degrees of freedom. We need to tune 7 parameters for the diagonal quantum
gates. On the other hand, there are only three independent angle because the
diagonal operators are , and . Hence, it is impossible to construct controlled-controlled phase
shift gate in general. However, this problem is solved by introducing
many-body Majorana interaction,
(S145)
Especially, the CCZ gate is constructed as follows
(S146)
The Toffoli gate is constructed by applying the Hadamard gate to the CCZ
gate as in
It is a generalization of the extraspecial 2 group. Correspondingly, we
obtain a generalized braiding group relation
(S157)
and
(S158)
for and . In the similar way, we find
(S159)
for . Hence, the -body Majorana operators satisfy a
genelized braiding group relation.
(S160)
and
(S161)
for .
References
[1] E. Artin, Theorie der z̈opfe, Abhandlungen Hamburg 4, 47
(1925); Theory of braids, Ann. of Math. (2) 48, 101 (1947).
[2] D. A. Ivanov, Non-Abelian statistics of half-quantum
vortices in p-wave superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 268 (2001).
[3] S. Das Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Topologically
protected qubits from a possible non-Abelian fractional quantum Hall state,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 166802 (2005).
[4] L. S. Georgiev, Topologically protected gates for
quantum computation with non-Abelian anyons in the Pfaffian quantum Hall
state, Phys. Rev. B 74, 235112 (2006).
[5] C. V. Kraus, P. Zoller and M. A. Baranov, Braiding of
atomic Majorana fermions in wire networks and implementation of the
Deutsch-Jozsa algorithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 203001 (2013).
[6] L. S. Georgiev, Towards a universal set of
topologically protected gates for quantum computation with Pfaffian qubits,
Nucl. Phys. B 789, 552 (2008).
[7] A. Ahlbrecht, L. S. Georgiev and R. F. Werner, Implementation
of Clifford gates in the Ising-anyon topological quantum computer, Phys.
Rev. A 79, 032311 (2009).
[8] C. P. Williams, Explorations in Quantum Computing (Texts
in Computer Science), Springer; 2nd edition (2011).
[9] D. Collins, N. Linden and S. Popescu, Nonlocal content of
quantum operations, Phys. Rev. A 64, 032302 (2001).
[10] A. Sorensen and K. Molmer, Quantum computation with Ions in
thermal motion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1971 (1999); Multiparticle Entanglement
of Hot Trapped Ions, Klaus Molmer and Anders Sorensen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82,
1835 (1999).
[11] A. D. Corcoles, E. Magesan, S. J. Srinivasan, A. W. Cross,
M. Steffen, J. M. Gambetta and J. M. Chow, Demonstration of a quantum error
detection code using a square lattice of four superconducting qubits, Nat.
Com. 6, 6979 (2015).
[12] C. Nayak and F. Wilczek, -quasihole states
realize -dimensional spinor braiding statistics in paired quantum
Hall states, Nucl. Phys. B 479, 529 (1996).
[13] L. S. Georgiev, Computational equivalence of the two
inequivalent spinor representations of the braid group in the Ising
topological quantum computer, J. Stat. Mech. P12013 (2009).
[14] N. Read, Non-Abelian braid statistics versus projective
permutation statistics, J. Math. Phys. 44, 558 (2003).
[15] A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum measurements and the Abelian
Stabilizer Problem, arXiv:quant-ph/9511026.
[16] D. Deutsch, Quantum Theory, the Church-Turing Principle
and the Universal Quantum Computer, Proceedings of the Royal Society A.
400, 97 (1985).
[17] D. Deutsch and R. Jozsa, Rapid solution of problems by quantum
computation, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 439, 553 (1992).
[18] D. Simon, On the power of quantum computation, SIAM Journal
on Computing, 26, 1474 (1997).
[19] E. Bernstein and U. Vazirani, Quantum Complexity Theory, SIAM
Journal on Computing, 26, 1411 (1997).
[20] L. K. Grover, A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for
database search, Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory
of Computing (STOC 1996).
[21] P.W. Shor,. Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete
logarithms and factoring, Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations
of Computer Science. IEEE Comput. Soc. Press: 124 (1994).
[22] A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. P. DiVincenzo, N.
Margolus, Peter Shor, Tycho Sleator, John A. Smolin, and Harald Weinfurter,
Elementary gates for quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 52, 3457 (1995).
[23] J. Franko, E. C. Rowell and Z. Wang, Extraspecial 2-groups
and images of braid group representations, J. Knot Theory Ramifications, 15,
413 (2006).