Tensor network based machine learning of non-Markovian quantum processes

We show how to learn structures of generic, non-Markovian, quantum stochastic processes using a tensor network based machine learning algorithm. We do this by representing the process as a matrix product operator (MPO) and train it with a database of local input states at different times and the corresponding time-nonlocal output state. In particular, we analyze a qubit coupled to an environment and predict output state of the system at different time, as well as reconstruct the full system process. We show how the bond dimension of the MPO, a measure of non-Markovianity, depends on the properties of the system, of the environment and of their interaction. Hence, this study opens the way to a possible experimental investigation into the process tensor and its properties.

[1]  G. Lindblad.  On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups , 1976 .

[2]  C. F. Roos,et al.  Efficient tomography of a quantum many-body system , 2016, Nature Physics.

[3]  S. Huelga,et al.  Quantum non-Markovianity: characterization, quantification and detection , 2014, Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society.

[4]  Philip Taranto,et al.  Structure of quantum stochastic processes with finite Markov order , 2018, Physical Review A.

[5]  Jun Wang,et al.  Unsupervised Generative Modeling Using Matrix Product States , 2017, Physical Review X.

[6]  U. Schollwoeck.  The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states , 2010, 1008.3477.

[7]  D. A. Grigoriev,et al.  Machine Learning Non-Markovian Quantum Dynamics. , 2019, Physical review letters.

[8]  J. Emerson,et al.  Scalable noise estimation with random unitary operators , 2005, quant-ph/0503243.

[9]  E. Miles Stoudenmire,et al.  Learning relevant features of data with multi-scale tensor networks , 2017, ArXiv.

[10]  Kavan Modi,et al.  Operational approach to open dynamics and quantifying initial correlations , 2010, Scientific Reports.

[11]  Ericka Stricklin-Parker,et al.  Ann , 2005 .

[12]  Kavan Modi,et al.  Tomographically reconstructed master equations for any open quantum dynamics , 2017, Quantum.

[13]  G A L White,et al.  Demonstration of non-Markovian process characterisation and control on a quantum processor , 2020, Nature Communications.

[14]  Peter Maunz,et al.  Demonstration of qubit operations below a rigorous fault tolerance threshold with gate set tomography , 2016, Nature Communications.

[15]  M. Paternostro,et al.  Non-Markovian quantum processes: Complete framework and efficient characterization , 2015, 1512.00589.

[16]  A Strathearn,et al.  Efficient non-Markovian quantum dynamics using time-evolving matrix product operators , 2017, Nature Communications.

[17]  Fabio Costa,et al.  A quantum causal discovery algorithm , 2017, Rethinking Causality in Quantum Mechanics.

[18]  E. Sudarshan,et al.  Completely Positive Dynamical Semigroups of N Level Systems , 1976 .

[19]  Fabio Costa,et al.  Quantum Markovianity as a supervised learning task , 2018, International Journal of Quantum Information.

[20]  R. Kosut,et al.  Efficient measurement of quantum dynamics via compressive sensing. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[21]  Philip Taranto,et al.  When Is a Non-Markovian Quantum Process Classical? , 2019, Physical Review X.

[22]  Felix A. Pollock,et al.  An Introduction to Operational Quantum Dynamics , 2017, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn..

[23]  Roger G. Melko,et al.  Machine-Learning Quantum States in the NISQ Era , 2019, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics.

[24]  Hans-J. Briegel,et al.  Machine learning \& artificial intelligence in the quantum domain , 2017, ArXiv.

[25]  I A Luchnikov,et al.  Simulation Complexity of Open Quantum Dynamics: Connection with Tensor Networks. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[26]  John Preskill,et al.  Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond , 2018, Quantum.

[27]  Thomas Frauenheim,et al.  Operational Markov Condition for Quantum Processes. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[28]  Naftali Tishby,et al.  Machine learning and the physical sciences , 2019, Reviews of Modern Physics.

[29]  E. Knill,et al.  Randomized Benchmarking of Quantum Gates , 2007, 0707.0963.

[30]  John T. Lewis,et al.  An operational approach to quantum probability , 1970 .

[31]  Chu Guo,et al.  Matrix product operators for sequence-to-sequence learning , 2018, Physical Review E.

[32]  Jürgen Schmidhuber,et al.  Long Short-Term Memory , 1997, Neural Computation.

[33]  Kavan Modi,et al.  Quantum Markov Order. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[34]  Philipp Strasberg,et al.  Classical quantum stochastic processes , 2019, Physical Review A.

[35]  Kavan Modi,et al.  Kolmogorov extension theorem for (quantum) causal modelling and general probabilistic theories , 2017, Quantum.

[36]  Simone Severini,et al.  Modelling non-markovian quantum processes with recurrent neural networks , 2018, New Journal of Physics.

[37]  Fabio Costa,et al.  Quantum causal modelling , 2015, 1512.07106.

[38]  Kenneth Rudinger,et al.  What Randomized Benchmarking Actually Measures. , 2017, Physical review letters.

[39]  Felix A. Pollock,et al.  Exploiting the Causal Tensor Network Structure of Quantum Processes to Efficiently Simulate Non-Markovian Path Integrals. , 2019, Physical review letters.

[40]  David Pérez-García,et al.  Area law for fixed points of rapidly mixing dissipative quantum systems , 2015, ArXiv.

[41]  Heinz-Peter Breuer,et al.  Foundations and measures of quantum non-Markovianity , 2012, 1206.5346.

[42]  D. Gross,et al.  Efficient quantum state tomography. , 2010, Nature communications.