Quantum State Tomography for Matrix Product Density Operators
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The reconstruction of quantum states from experimental measurements, often achieved using quantum state tomography (QST), is crucial for the verification and benchmarking of quantum devices. However, performing QST for a generic unstructured quantum state requires an enormous number of state copies that grows exponentially with the number of individual quanta in the system, even for the most optimal measurement settings. Fortunately, many physical quantum states, such as states generated by noisy, intermediate-scale quantum computers, are usually structured. In one dimension, such states are expected to be well approximated by matrix product operators (MPOs) with a finite matrix/bond dimension independent of the number of qubits, therefore enabling efficient state representation. Nevertheless, it is still unclear whether efficient QST can be performed for these states in general. In this paper, we attempt to bridge this gap and establish theoretical guarantees for the stable recovery of MPOs using tools from compressive sensing and the theory of empirical processes. We begin by studying two types of random measurement settings: Gaussian measurements and Haar random rank-one Positive Operator Valued Measures (POVMs). We show that the information contained in an MPO with a finite bond dimension can be preserved using a number of random measurements that depends only linearly on the number of qubits, assuming no statistical error of the measurements. We then study MPO-based QST with physical quantum measurements through Haar random rank-one POVMs that can be implemented on quantum computers. We prove that only a polynomial number of state copies in the number of qubits is required to guarantee bounded recovery error of an MPO state.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 3.
10 papers.
- 2024Guaranteed Nonconvex Factorization Approach for Tensor Train Recoverycited by 8
- 2025Tensor Train Quantum State Tomography using Compressed Sensingcited by 5
- 2023Learning finitely correlated states: stability of the spectral reconstructioncited by 4
- 2024Computational and Statistical Guarantees for Tensor-on-Tensor Regression with Tensor Train Decompositioncited by 4
- 2025A Scalable Factorization Approach for High-Order Structured Tensor Recoverycited by 4
- 2024Robust Low-rank Tensor Train Recoverycited by 2
- 2025Fast and Provable Tensor-Train Format Tensor Completion via Precondtioned Riemannian Gradient Descentcited by 0
- 2026Structured Adaptive Tensor Prediction for Streaming Datacited by 0
- 2026A Block Tensor Train Burer-Monteiro Framework for Low-Rank Quantum State Tomographycited by 0
- 2026Generalization of Transformer-Based Neural Quantum States via In-Context Learningcited by 0
- 2026Generalization of Transformer-Based Neural Quantum States via In-Context Learning2 Oct 2026
- 2026A Block Tensor Train Burer-Monteiro Framework for Low-Rank Quantum State Tomography8 Sep 2026
- 2026Structured Adaptive Tensor Prediction for Streaming Data8 Jun 2026
- 2025Tensor Train Quantum State Tomography using Compressed Sensing30 Jun 2025
- 2025A Scalable Factorization Approach for High-Order Structured Tensor Recovery19 Jun 2025
- 2025Fast and Provable Tensor-Train Format Tensor Completion via Precondtioned Riemannian Gradient Descent23 Jan 2025
- 2024Robust Low-rank Tensor Train Recovery19 Oct 2024
- 2024Computational and Statistical Guarantees for Tensor-on-Tensor Regression with Tensor Train Decomposition10 Jun 2024
- 2024Guaranteed Nonconvex Factorization Approach for Tensor Train Recovery5 Jan 2024
- 2023Learning finitely correlated states: stability of the spectral reconstruction12 Dec 2023