Estimating the degree of non-Markovianity using machine learning

In the last years, application of machine learning methods have become increasingly relevant in different fields of physics. One of the most significant subjects in the theory of open quantum systems is the study of the characterization of non-Markovian memory effects that emerge dynamically throughout the time evolution of open systems as they interact with their surrounding environment. Here we consider two well established quantifiers of the degree of memory effects, namely, the trace distance and the entanglement based measures of non-Markovianity. We demonstrate that using machine learning techniques, in particular, support vector machine algorithms, it is possible to estimate the degree of non-Markovianity in two paradigmatic open system models with very high precision. Our approach has the potential to be experimentally feasible to estimate the degree of non-Markovianity, since it requires a single or at most two rounds of state tomography.

[1]  X. Yi,et al.  Exact non-Markovian master equation for a driven damped two-level system , 2014, 1406.7374.

[2]  Ievgeniia Oshurko.  Quantum Machine Learning , 2020, Quantum Computing.

[3]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  A tutorial on support vector regression , 2004, Stat. Comput..

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

[5]  F. F. Fanchini,et al.  Inequivalence of correlation-based measures of non-Markovianity , 2016, 1606.03069.

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

[7]  Krzysztof Wódkiewicz,et al.  Depolarizing channel as a completely positive map with memory , 2004 .

[8]  W. Wootters,et al.  Entanglement of a Pair of Quantum Bits , 1997, quant-ph/9703041.

[9]  R Urbanczik,et al.  Universal learning curves of support vector machines. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[10]  Li Li,et al.  Concepts of quantum non-Markovianity: A hierarchy , 2017, Physics Reports.

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

[12]  Sabrina Maniscalco,et al.  Non-Markovian Dynamics of a Damped Driven Two-State System , 2010, 1001.3564.

[13]  David J. Schwab,et al.  A high-bias, low-variance introduction to Machine Learning for physicists , 2018, Physics reports.

[14]  Jiangfeng Du,et al.  Experimental realization of a quantum support vector machine. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[15]  F. F. Fanchini,et al.  Unveiling phase transitions with machine learning , 2019, Physical Review B.

[16]  J. Vybíral,et al.  Big data of materials science: critical role of the descriptor. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[17]  Renato Renner,et al.  Discovering physical concepts with neural networks , 2018, Physical review letters.

[18]  M. Opper,et al.  Statistical mechanics of Support Vector networks. , 1998, cond-mat/9811421.

[19]  Matthias Troyer,et al.  Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks , 2016, Science.

[20]  J. Piilo,et al.  Controlling entropic uncertainty bound through memory effects , 2015, 1504.02391.

[21]  Roger G. Melko,et al.  Machine learning phases of matter , 2016, Nature Physics.

[22]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[23]  Roger G. Melko,et al.  Learning Thermodynamics with Boltzmann Machines , 2016, ArXiv.

[24]  Felipe Fernandes Fanchini,et al.  Non-Markovianity through Accessible Information , 2014 .

[25]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[26]  Zhiming Huang,et al.  Non-Markovian dynamics of quantum coherence of two-level system driven by classical field , 2017, Quantum Inf. Process..

[27]  Ke Liu,et al.  Learning multiple order parameters with interpretable machines , 2018, Physical Review B.

[28]  Susana F Huelga,et al.  Entanglement and non-markovianity of quantum evolutions. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[29]  B. M. Garraway,et al.  Nonperturbative decay of an atomic system in a cavity , 1997 .

[30]  S. Maniscalco,et al.  Comparative study of non-Markovianity measures in exactly solvable one- and two-qubit models , 2014, 1402.4975.

[31]  G. Compagno,et al.  Non-markovian effects on the dynamics of entanglement. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[32]  Roger G. Melko,et al.  Kernel methods for interpretable machine learning of order parameters , 2017, 1704.05848.

[33]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects , 2015, Science.

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

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

[36]  Rafael Chaves,et al.  Machine Learning Nonlocal Correlations. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[37]  S. Maniscalco,et al.  Non-Markovianity and reservoir memory of quantum channels: a quantum information theory perspective , 2014, Scientific Reports.

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

[39]  Matthias Troyer,et al.  Neural-network quantum state tomography , 2018 .

[40]  Sergey Ioffe,et al.  Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift , 2015, ICML.

[41]  John J. L. Morton,et al.  Using deep learning to understand and mitigate the qubit noise environment , 2020 .

[42]  Kristan Temme,et al.  Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces , 2018, Nature.

[43]  R. C. Williamson,et al.  Support vector regression with automatic accuracy control. , 1998 .

[44]  P. Haikka.  Non-Markovian master equation for a damped driven two-state system , 2009, 0911.4600.

[45]  G. Karpat,et al.  Non-Markovianity through flow of information between a system and an environment , 2014, 1410.2504.

[46]  Alexander J. Smola,et al.  Learning with kernels , 1998 .

[47]  J. Piilo,et al.  Non-Markovian quantum dynamics: What is it good for? , 2020, EPL (Europhysics Letters).

[48]  S. Wissmann,et al.  Optimal state pairs for non-Markovian quantum dynamics , 2012, 1209.4989.

[49]  Elsi-Mari Laine,et al.  Colloquium: Non-Markovian dynamics in open quantum systems , 2015, 1505.01385.

[50]  M. Plenio,et al.  Quantifying coherence. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[51]  Gordon,et al.  Generalization properties of finite-size polynomial support vector machines , 2000, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[52]  G. Guo,et al.  Experimental control of the transition from Markovian to non-Markovian dynamics of open quantum systems , 2011, 1109.2677.

[53]  Felipe F. Fanchini,et al.  Probing the degree of non-Markovianity for independent and common environments , 2013, 1301.3146.

[54]  M. Plenio,et al.  Colloquium: quantum coherence as a resource , 2016, 1609.02439.

[55]  Jyrki Piilo,et al.  Measure for the degree of non-markovian behavior of quantum processes in open systems. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[56]  Dario Poletti,et al.  Tensor network based machine learning of non-Markovian quantum processes , 2020 .