On the Hardness of Measuring Magic

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2408.01663
• Title: On the Hardness of Measuring Magic
• Authors: Roy J. Garcia, Gaurav Bhole, Kaifeng Bu, Liyuan Chen, Haribabu Arthanari, Arthur Jaffe
• Institutions: Harvard University, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School
• Classification: quant-ph (Quantum Physics)
• Publication Date: August 6, 2024
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.01663

Abstract

Quantum computers promise to solve computational problems faster than classical computers, with these "speedups" achieved by leveraging a resource called "magic." The amount of magic used by a device can quantify its potential computational power. Without this property, quantum computers would not be faster than classical computers. This paper introduces Pauli instability as a measure of magic and conducts experimental measurements on the IBM Eagle quantum processor. The research demonstrates that measuring large (i.e., extensive) amounts of magic is infeasible. Results indicate that magic can only be measured when the quantum computer does not provide speedup. The study supports these conclusions through theoretical and experimental evidence, demonstrating both the capabilities and limitations of quantum technology in measuring one of the most important resources in quantum computing.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Research Problem

The core problem addressed in this paper is: Can magic be accurately measured on large-scale quantum computers?

Magic is a key resource in quantum computing that quantifies the ability of quantum computers to surpass classical computers. Without magic, a quantum computer's computational power would not exceed that of classical supercomputers.

2. Problem Significance

• Foundation of Quantum Advantage: Magic is a necessary condition for achieving quantum advantage. Quantum computers can only surpass classical computers in computational speed by utilizing magic.
• Practical Application Value: Measuring magic can assess the capabilities of real quantum computers, which is crucial for applications of quantum computing in biology, chemistry, physics, cryptography, machine learning, and finance.
• Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing: The generation cost of magic states directly relates to the implementation of fault-tolerant universal quantum computing.
• Classical Simulation Boundary: Magic monotones are used to prove bounds on the time required for classical simulation.

3. Limitations of Existing Methods

• Exponential Complexity: Existing magic monotones (such as robustness of magic, stabilizer rank, mana, etc.) are typically defined as sums or optimizations over exponentially many variables, making them difficult to measure.
• Experimental Constraints: Google's 2022 measurement of magic monotones on IBM quantum processors required exponentially many physical measurements, making it infeasible for large-scale systems.
• Open Questions: The additive Bell magic measured on IonQ quantum computers in 2023 was believed to be feasible at large scales, but the authors argue this requires further verification.

4. Research Motivation

This paper aims to systematically investigate the feasibility boundaries of magic measurement from both theoretical and experimental perspectives, particularly:

• Introducing new measurable magic metrics
• Establishing quantitative relationships between measurement complexity and magic quantity
• Exploring the inherent contradiction between quantum advantage and magic measurability

Core Contributions

1. Proposing Pauli Instability: Introduces a new magic monotone based on out-of-time-ordered correlators (OTOC), possessing properties of faithfulness, invariance, additivity, and good scaling with T-gate count.
2. Establishing Complexity Theory: Proves Theorem 1, showing that the Pauli sampling complexity required to measure magic grows exponentially with magic quantity: N = e^{2I(U)}f(η,δ)
3. Determining Feasibility Boundaries:
   • When I(U) = log(n), magic can be measured efficiently and accurately (polynomial complexity)
   • When I(U) = linear(n), accurate measurement is infeasible (exponential complexity)
4. Proposing Important Conjecture (Conjecture 1): For any reliable magic monotone M, when M = linear(n), efficient and accurate measurement is impossible.
5. Experimental Verification: Experimentally measures Pauli instability on the IBM Eagle quantum processor, verifying theoretical predictions and demonstrating the impact of noise on measurements.
6. Theoretical Insights: Reveals the inherent contradiction in magic measurement—magic can only be measured when the quantum computer does not demonstrate quantum advantage, connecting the magic measurement problem to chaos theory and barren plateau problems.

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input: n-qubit unitary operator U (typically a quantum circuit)
Output: An approximation I_N(U) of the magic quantity I(U) of U
Constraints:

• Error bound: |I_N(U) - I(U)| < η with probability at least 1-δ
• Efficiency requirement: Sampling complexity N = poly(n)

Definition of Pauli Instability

Definition 1: The Pauli instability of a unitary operator U is defined as:

$I(U) = -\log\left[\mathbb{E}_{P_1,P_2\in Q^{\otimes n}}|OTOC(U,P_1,P_2)|\right]$

where:

• $OTOC(U,P_1,P_2) = \frac{1}{2^n}Tr\{U^\dagger P_1 U P_2 U^\dagger P_1 U P_2\}$
• $Q^{\otimes n} = \{\otimes_{i=1}^n P^{(i)} : P^{(i)} \in \{I,X,Y,Z\}\}$ is the set of n-qubit Pauli strings
• $\mathbb{E}$ denotes uniform expectation over $Q^{\otimes n}$

Core Properties

1. Faithfulness:
   • I(U) ≥ 0 for all unitary operators
   • I(U) = 0 if and only if U is a Clifford unitary operator
2. Invariance:
   • I(V₁UV₂) = I(U) for any Clifford unitary operators V₁ and V₂
3. Additivity:
   • I(U₁ ⊗ U₂) = I(U₁) + I(U₂)
4. Scaling with T gates:
   • I(T^⊗k ⊗ I^⊗(n-k)) = k log(4/3)
   • Independent of T-gate position

Approximate Measurement Method

Since exact computation requires 16^n terms, a sampling method is employed in practice:

1. Pauli Sampling: Uniformly sample N pairs of Pauli strings $\{(P_1^{(i)}, P_2^{(i)})\}_{i=1}^N$ from $Q^{\otimes n}$
2. Constructing Approximator: $I_N(U) = -\log\left[\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N|OTOC(U,P_1^{(i)},P_2^{(i)})|\right]$
3. OTOC Measurement: Using the quantum circuit shown in Figure 2 to measure OTOC
   • Requires n reference qubits, n system qubits, and 1 control qubit
   • Obtain OTOC value by measuring the expectation value ⟨X_C⟩ of the control qubit in the X basis

Technical Innovations

1. Connection Between Chaos and Magic:
   • Links OTOC (traditionally used to measure scrambling in chaotic systems) with magic measurement
   • Clifford unitary operators map Pauli strings to single Pauli strings: U†PU = e^{-iφ}P'
   • Non-Clifford unitary operators map Pauli strings to superpositions of multiple Pauli strings: U†PU = ΣᵢcᵢPᵢ ("delocalization" in Pauli space)
   • This scrambling property causes |OTOC| to approach zero, yielding I(U) > 0
2. Scalability Design:
   • Through sampling rather than exact computation, the method is in principle scalable to large systems
   • Explicit formulas for sampling complexity facilitate feasibility analysis
3. Connection to Classical Simulation:
   • Efficiently measurable magic quantity (log(n)) corresponds exactly to classically simulable circuits
   • Inefficiently measurable magic quantity (linear(n)) corresponds to circuits that may demonstrate quantum advantage

Experimental Setup

Experimental Platform

• Quantum Processor: IBM Eagle quantum processor
• System Scale: 4-5 qubits (small scale to mitigate noise effects)

Experimental Circuits

1. Simple Architecture Uₖ (Figure 1c top):
   • Single layer of k T-gates: T^⊗k
   • Used to verify basic scaling relationships
2. Complex Architecture Vₖ (Figure 1c bottom):
   • k-layer structure, each layer containing:
     • H-gate layer
     • Two layers of interleaved CNOT gates
     • S-gate layer
     • Single T-gate (applied to the i-th qubit)
   • Simulates complex circuit structures in practical quantum computing

Experimental Parameters

• Pauli Sampling Complexity N: 500 (far smaller than the 16^n required for exact computation)
• OTOC Sampling Complexity M: 500
• Repetitions: Each data point independently measured 5 times and averaged
• Numerical Simulation: n=10 qubits (Figure 1a)
• Experimental Measurement: n=4-5 qubits (Figures 1b,d)

Comparison Methods

• Exact Value: I(Uₖ) = k log(4/3) (black dots)
• Numerical Simulation: I_N(Uₖ) in noise-free environment (blue dots)
• Experimental Measurement: I_N(Uₖ) in noisy environment (red dots)

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Numerical Simulation Results (Figure 1a)

• System Scale: n=10 qubits
• Observations:
  • When T-gate count is small (k < 5), simulated values (blue dots) align well with exact values (black dots), showing linear relationship
  • When T-gate count is comparable to system scale (k ≥ 5), approximation accuracy significantly decreases
  • Simulated values begin to underestimate true magic values
• Verification: Confirms Theorem 1's prediction—as magic increases, more samples are needed to maintain measurement precision

2. Experimental Measurement Results (Figure 1b)

• System Scale: n=5 qubits
• Observations:
  • Initial stage (k=1,2): Experimental values (red dots) overestimate true values due to inherent noise in the quantum processor
  • Middle stage: Experimental values gradually approach exact values
  • Later stage (k≥5): Both experimental and simulated values underestimate exact values
• Noise Impact Analysis:
  • Assuming Uₖ is affected by depolarizing noise of strength λ
  • Pauli instability becomes: I(Uₖ) → I(Uₖ) - log(1-λ)
  • Noise increases the monotone value, giving false signals of magic
  • This is consistent with the first two red data points

3. Complex Circuit Architecture Results (Figure 1d)

• System Scale: n=4 qubits
• Circuit Structure: Vₖ contains multiple layers of Clifford and entangling gates
• Observations:
  • Experimental measurement values roughly scale linearly with T-gate count
  • Verifies the reliability of the monotone for complex circuit architectures
  • As circuit depth increases, noise effects become more pronounced, causing experimental values to be higher than simulated values

Theoretical Results

Theorem 1 (Pauli Sampling Complexity)

Given δ, η > 0, when Pauli sampling complexity is: $N = e^{2I(U)}f(\eta,\delta)$ then |I_N(U) - I(U)| < η with probability at least 1-δ

where: $f(\eta,\delta) = \frac{\ln(1/\delta)}{2(1-e^{g\eta})^2}$, $g = sign(I(U)-I_N(U))$

Key Implication: Measuring more magic requires exponentially more samples

Corollary 1 (Feasibility Boundary)

• Feasible Case: When I(U) = log(n), magic can be efficiently and accurately approximated (N = poly(n))
• Infeasible Case: When I(U) = linear(n), accurate approximation is infeasible (N = exp(n))

Concrete Example: For Uₖ = T^⊗k ⊗ I^⊗(n-k)

• N = e^{8k/3}f(η,δ)
• Measurement is efficient when k = log(n)
• Measurement is infeasible when k = linear(n)

Proposition 1 (OTOC Sampling Complexity)

With probability at least 1-δ, the number of samples required to measure OTOC(U,P₁,P₂) to error γOTOC(U,P₁,P₂) (0<γ<1) is: $M = \frac{\ln(1/\delta)}{\gamma^2 OTOC(U,P_1,P_2)^2}$

Corollary 2 (OTOC Measurement Feasibility)

• Feasible: When OTOC(U) = 1/poly(n)
• Infeasible: When OTOC(U) = exp(-n)

Key Insight: For Haar-random unitary operators, OTOC values are typically exp(-n), making measurement infeasible

Experimental Findings

1. Exponential Growth of Sampling Complexity: Both experiments and simulations confirm that as magic increases, measurement precision decreases, requiring exponentially more samples.
2. Dual Effects of Noise:
   • Low magic: Noise causes overestimation
   • High magic: Insufficient sampling causes underestimation
3. Measurability of Complex Circuits: Even for complex circuits with multiple gate layers, Pauli instability can capture magic growth with T-gate count.
4. Feasibility Threshold: When T-gate count reaches the order of system scale, measurement precision significantly decreases.

Related Work

Magic Monotones

1. Robustness of magic 22: Robustness-based measure
2. Stabilizer rank 24: Stabilizer rank
3. Mana and relative entropy of magic 21: Relative entropy-based measures
4. Magic entropy 54: Magic entropy
5. Stabilizer Rényi entropy 55: Stabilizer Rényi entropy
6. Additive Bell magic 43: Additive Bell magic

Experimental Measurement Work

1. 2021 Google Experiment 42: Detecting magic characteristics on Sycamore quantum processor
2. 2022 IBM Experiment 23: Measuring new magic monotones, but requiring exponentially many physical measurements
3. 2023 IonQ Experiment 43: Measuring additive Bell magic, believed to be feasible at large scales
4. 2024 Logical Quantum Processor 46: Measuring additive Bell magic on logical quantum processor

OTOC Measurement Techniques

1. Interferometric Method 56: Proposed by Swingle et al., adopted in this paper
2. Random Measurement Toolbox 57,58: Based on random measurements
3. Teleportation Technique 59,60: Based on quantum teleportation
4. Classical Shadow Formalism 61,62: Using classical shadow framework

Advantages of This Work

1. Theoretical Completeness: First to establish rigorous theoretical bounds on magic measurement complexity
2. Scalability: Proposed method is compatible with quantum platforms with single-qubit readout
3. Experimental Verification: Verifies theoretical predictions on real quantum processors
4. Universal Insights: Proposes conjecture applicable to any reliable magic measure

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Establishment of Feasibility Boundaries:
   • Small amounts of magic (I(U) = log(n)) can be efficiently and accurately measured on large-scale quantum computers
   • Large amounts of magic (I(U) = linear(n)) are infeasible to measure
2. Paradox of Quantum Advantage:
   • Magic can only be measured when the quantum computer does not demonstrate quantum advantage
   • Circuits demonstrating quantum advantage (containing linear(n) T-gates) have magic that cannot be efficiently measured
   • This reveals an inherent contradiction in magic measurement
3. Universal Conjecture (Conjecture 1):
   • For any reliable magic monotone M, when M = linear(n), efficient and accurate measurement is impossible
   • This is because many magic monotones have the form M = -log(exp(-N_T)), and accurately extracting exp(-N_T) requires error exponentially smaller than N_T
4. Connection Between Chaos and Magic:
   • Pauli instability connects magic measurement with quantum chaos (scrambling)
   • The scrambling property of non-Clifford unitary operators is the source of their magic

Limitations

1. Experimental Scale Constraints:
   • Due to noise effects, experiments are conducted only on 4-5 qubits
   • Cannot directly verify behavior on large-scale systems
2. Noise Sensitivity:
   • Experimental results show that noise produces false magic signals
   • Requires development of noise-robust measurement protocols
3. Theoretical Completeness:
   • Conjecture 1 has not been rigorously proven
   • Further theoretical work is needed on non-measurability for general magic monotones
4. Sampling Efficiency:
   • Current method requires substantial samples for moderate magic quantities
   • More efficient sampling strategies may exist
5. Circuit Architecture Dependence:
   • Although two circuit architectures were tested, applicability to broader circuit types requires further research

Future Directions

1. Open Problems:
   • Rigorously prove Conjecture 1
   • Prove that magic cannot be measured when quantum computers demonstrate quantum advantage
2. Noise Robustness:
   • Develop noise-robust magic measurement protocols
   • Leverage techniques successful in chaos measurement for handling noise 59
3. Quantum Machine Learning Connection:
   • Explore whether magic can be learned through quantum machine learning
   • Conjecture similar barren plateau problems will be encountered
   • This parallels the phenomenon in quantum machine learning where only models without quantum advantage are trainable 69-71
4. Deeper Understanding of Precision Issues:
   • Establish deeper connections between magic measurement precision problems and barren plateau problems
   • Understand why more magic requires ultra-fine measurement precision
5. Practical Applications:
   • Develop practical tools for assessing real quantum computer capabilities
   • Provide guidance for magic state distillation in fault-tolerant quantum computing

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Significant Theoretical Contribution:
   • First to establish rigorous mathematical bounds on magic measurement complexity
   • Theorem 1 provides explicit quantitative relationships between sampling complexity and magic quantity
   • Reveals profound contradiction between quantum advantage and magic measurability
2. Strong Method Innovation:
   • Creatively applies OTOC (chaos theory tool) to magic measurement
   • Pauli instability satisfies all ideal monotone properties
   • Provides scalable measurement scheme
3. Theory-Experiment Integration:
   • Not only rigorous theoretical proofs but also experimental verification on IBM quantum processor
   • Numerical simulations, theoretical predictions, and experimental results mutually validate each other
   • Analyzes specific noise impacts on measurements
4. Deep Insights:
   • Connects magic measurement problem with chaos, barren plateaus, and quantum advantage
   • Proposed Conjecture 1 has universality, applicable to all reliable magic monotones
   • Reveals measurement as fundamentally a precision problem
5. Clear Writing:
   • Logical paper structure, progressing from definitions to theory to experiments
   • Rigorous mathematical expressions with clear physical intuitions
   • Intuitive figure design effectively supports arguments

Weaknesses

1. Limited Experimental Scale:
   • Due to noise, experiments conducted only on 4-5 qubits
   • Cannot directly verify behavior on large-scale systems (e.g., n=50-100 qubits)
   • This is a universal limitation of current quantum hardware but still affects direct applicability
2. Theoretical Completeness:
   • Conjecture 1, while well-argued, lacks rigorous proof
   • Proof of non-measurability for general magic monotones left as open problem
   • Possible special magic measures might circumvent complexity barriers
3. Insufficient Noise Handling:
   • While noise effects are analyzed, no robust measurement schemes are provided
   • Experimental results show noise produces false magic signals
   • More effective noise mitigation strategies needed for practical applications
4. Sampling Strategy Optimization:
   • Current approach uses uniform sampling, possibly not optimal
   • Whether importance sampling or other techniques could reduce sampling complexity unexplored
   • For moderate magic quantities, sampling requirements remain substantial
5. Circuit Type Coverage:
   • Experiments test only two relatively simple circuit architectures
   • Applicability to more complex practical quantum algorithms (VQE, QAOA) requires verification
   • Different circuit topologies may affect measurement efficiency

Impact

1. Contribution to Quantum Computing Theory:
   • Provides important measurability bounds for magic theory
   • Reveals fundamental limitation in quantum resource theory
   • May influence future magic monotone design directions
2. Guidance for Experimental Quantum Computing:
   • Provides theoretical foundation for assessing quantum processor capabilities
   • Helps understand which magic measures are practically feasible
   • Important implications for quantum advantage verification experiments
3. Cross-Disciplinary Connections:
   • Establishes new connections between quantum computing and chaos theory
   • Resonates with barren plateau problems in quantum machine learning
   • May inspire measurability studies of other quantum resources
4. Practical Value:
   • Pauli instability serves as practical tool for evaluating quantum circuits
   • Helps identify classically simulable circuits
   • Provides reference for resource estimation in fault-tolerant quantum computing
5. Reproducibility:
   • Clear method description, easy to reproduce
   • Experiments on publicly available IBM quantum processors
   • Rigorous theoretical proofs, facilitating verification and extension

Applicable Scenarios

1. Quantum Circuit Analysis:
   • Assess non-classicality of quantum circuits
   • Identify classically simulable circuits (I(U) = log(n))
   • Estimate circuit computational complexity
2. Quantum Processor Evaluation:
   • Measure small-scale quantum processor magic generation capability
   • Compare performance across different quantum platforms
   • Verify quality of quantum gate operations
3. Quantum Algorithm Design:
   • Guide algorithm design to balance magic usage and measurability
   • Optimize T-gate usage to improve classical simulation efficiency
   • Provide complexity analysis for variational quantum algorithms
4. Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing:
   • Estimate magic state distillation resource requirements
   • Evaluate magic overhead of different encoding schemes
   • Optimize fault-tolerant protocol design
5. Quantum Advantage Research:
   • Understand resource requirements for quantum advantage
   • Verify credibility of quantum advantage claims
   • Design verifiable quantum advantage demonstrations

Non-Applicable Scenarios:

• Precise magic measurement for large-scale quantum circuits (>50 qubits, containing linear(n) T-gates)
• Applications requiring real-time magic monitoring
• Accurate measurement in high-noise environments

Key References

1. Gottesman (1998): Foundational work on Clifford groups and stabilizer formalism
2. Bravyi & Kitaev (2005): Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas—role of magic states in fault-tolerant quantum computing
3. Veitch et al. (2014): Original definition of relative entropy of magic
4. Howard & Campbell (2017): Introduction of robustness of magic
5. Mi et al. (2021): Google's OTOC and magic measurement experiments on Sycamore processor
6. Haug & Kim (2023): Measurement of additive Bell magic

Overall Assessment: This is an important paper in quantum computing resource theory that, through rigorous theoretical analysis and experimental verification, reveals fundamental limitations of magic measurement and proposes a profound quantum advantage paradox. The paper's main value lies in establishing quantitative feasibility boundaries for measurability and connecting magic measurement with core concepts including chaos, quantum advantage, and related phenomena. Despite limitations in experimental scale and incomplete theoretical proofs of some results, its pioneering insights and rigorous methodology make it an important reference in the field.