Quantum Information & Computation
Volume 25, Issue 6
RESEARCH ARTICLE Open access

Simple Ways of Preparing Qudit Dicke States

Noah B. Kerzner, Federico Galeazzi, Rafael I. Nepomechie

Author affiliations
  • Noah B. Kerzner1
  • Federico Galeazzi2
  • Rafael I. Nepomechie3
  1. Department of Physics and Astronomy, 153 Olin Science Bldg., Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA, USA; Department of Physics, P.O. Box 248046, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA
  2. Department of Physics, P.O. Box 248046, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA; Coral Gables High School, 450 Bird Rd, Coral Gables, FL, USA
  3. Department of Physics, P.O. Box 248046, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA

pp. 668-686 · 10.2478/qic-2025-0036

Read PDF View on Reference Global
On this page

Abstract

Dicke states are permutation-invariant superpositions of qubit computational basis states, which play a prominent role in quantum information science. We consider here two higher-dimensional generalizations of these states: SU (d) spin- s Dicke states and SU (2) Dicke states. We present various ways of preparing both types of qudit Dicke states on a qudit quantum computer, using two main approaches: a deterministic approach, based on exact canonical matrix product state representations; and a probabilistic approach, based on quantum phase estimation. The quantum circuits are explicit and straightforward, and are arguably simpler than those previously reported.
Open accessCC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Keywords

  • qudits
  • quantum state preparation
  • Dicke states
  • matrix product states
  • QPE

Suggested citation

Noah B. Kerzner, Federico Galeazzi, Rafael I. Nepomechie (2025). Simple Ways of Preparing Qudit Dicke States. Quantum Information & Computation, 25(6), 668-686. https://doi.org/10.2478/qic-2025-0036

Download BibTeX

References (34)

  1. R. H. Dicke (1954). Coherence in Spontaneous Radiation Processes. Phys. Rev. 93, 99–110.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.93.99Google Scholar
  2. C. Marconi, G. Müller-Rigat, J. Romero-Pallejà, J. Tura and and A. Sanpera, “Symmetric quantum states: a review of recent progress,” arXiv:2506.10185 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
  3. A. Bärtschi and S. Eidenbenz (2019). Deterministic preparation of Dicke states. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 126–139, arXiv:1904.07358 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-25027-0_9Google Scholar
  4. Y. Wang and B. M. Terhal (2021). Preparing Dicke states in a spin ensemble using phase estimation. Phys. Rev. A, 104 no. 3, arXiv:2104.14310 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.104.032407Google Scholar
  5. H. Buhrman, M. Folkertsma, B. Loff and N. M. P. Neumann (2024). State preparation by shallow circuits using feed forward. Quantum 8, 1552, arXiv:2307.14840 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.22331/q-2024-12-09-1552Google Scholar
  6. L. J. Bond, M. J. Davis, J. Minář, R. Gerritsma, G. K. Brennen and A. Safavi-Naini (2025). Global variational quantum circuits for arbitrary symmetric state preparation. Phys. Rev. Res. 7 no. 2, L022072, arXiv:2312.05060 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L022072Google Scholar
  7. L. Piroli, G. Styliaris and J. I. Cirac (2024). Approximating Many-Body Quantum States with Quantum Circuits and Measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 no. 23, 230401, arXiv:2403.07604 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.230401Google Scholar
  8. J. Yu, S. R. Muleady, Y.-X. Wang, N. Schine, A. V. Gorshkov and A. M. Childs, “Efficient preparation of Dicke states,” arXiv:2411.03428 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
  9. Z. Liu, A. M. Childs and D. Gottesman, “Low-depth quantum symmetrization,” arXiv:2411.04019 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
  10. Y. Wang, Z. Hu, B. C. Sanders and S. Kais (2020). Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing. Front. Phys. 8, 479, arXiv:2008.00959 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.3389/fphy.2020.589504Google Scholar
  11. M. Ringbauer, M. Meth, L. Postler, R. Stricker, R. Blatt, P. Schindler and T. Monz (2022). A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions. Nature Phys. 18 no. 9, 1053–1057, arXiv:2109.06903 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1038/s41567-022-01658-0Google Scholar
  12. N. Goss, A. Morvan, B. Marinelli, B. K. Mitchell, L. B. Nguyen, R. K. Naik, et al. (2022). High-fidelity qutrit entangling gates for superconducting circuits. Nature Comm. 13, 7481, arXiv:2206.07216 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-34851-zGoogle Scholar
  13. K. Luo et al. (2023). Experimental Realization of Two Qutrits Gate with Tunable Coupling in Superconducting Circuits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 no. 3, 030603, arXiv:2206.11199 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.030603Google Scholar
  14. J. Lindon, A. Tashchilina, L. W. Cooke and L. J. LeBlanc (2023). Complete Unitary Qutrit Control in Ultracold Atoms. Phys. Rev. Applied 19 no. 3, 034089, arXiv:2208.00045 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.19.034089Google Scholar
  15. L. E. Fischer, A. Chiesa, F. Tacchino, D. J. Egger, S. Carretta and I. Tavernelli (2023). “Universal Qudit Gate Synthesis for Transmons,” PRX Quantum 4 no. 3, 030327, arXiv:2212.04496 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030327Google Scholar
  16. P. Liu et al., (2023). “Performing SU(d) Operations and Rudimentary Algorithms in a Superconducting Transmon Qudit for d=3 and d=4,” Phys. Rev. X 13 no. 2, 021028, arXiv:2304.11841 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.021028Google Scholar
  17. Z. Meng, W.-Q. Liu, B.-W. Song, X.-Y. Wang, A.-N. Zhang and Z.-Q. Yin (2024). “Experimental realization of high-dimensional quantum gates with ultrahigh fidelity and efficiency,” Phys. Rev. A 109 no. 2, 022612, arXiv:2311.18179 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.109.022612Google Scholar
  18. B. L. Brock, S. Singh, A. Eickbusch, V. V. Sivak, A. Z. Ding, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin and M. H. Devoret (2025). “Quantum error correction of qudits beyond break-even,” Nature 641 no. 8063, 612–618, arXiv:2409.15065 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-08899-yGoogle Scholar
  19. X. Herbert, J. Gross and M. Newman, “Qutrit codes within representations of SU(3),” arXiv:2312.00162 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
  20. R. F. Uy and D. A. Gangloff (2025). “Qudit-based quantum error-correcting codes from irreducible representations of SU(d),” Phys. Rev. A 112 042402, arXiv:2410.02407 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
  21. C.-J. Lin, Z.-W. Liu, V. V. Albert and A. V. Gorshkov (2025). “Covariant Quantum Error-Correcting Codes with Metrological Entanglement Advantage,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 135 110801, arXiv:2409.20561 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/dttc-ksdnGoogle Scholar
  22. R. I. Nepomechie, F. Ravanini and D. Raveh (2024). “Spin-s Dicke states and their preparation,” Adv. Quant. Tech. 7 2400057, arXiv:2402.03233 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1002/qute.202400057Google Scholar
  23. R. I. Nepomechie and D. Raveh (2024). “Qudit Dicke state preparation,” Quantum Inf. Comp. 24 0037–0056, arXiv:2301.04989 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.26421/QIC24.1-2-2Google Scholar
  24. C. Schön, E. Solano, F. Verstraete, J. I. Cirac and M. M. Wolf (2005). “Sequential generation of entangled multiqubit states,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 110503, arXiv:0501096 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.110503Google Scholar
  25. D. Raveh and R. I. Nepomechie (2024). “Dicke states as matrix product states,” Phys. Rev. A 110 no. 5, 052438, arXiv:2408.04729 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.110.052438Google Scholar
  26. A. Y. Kitaev, “Quantum measurements and the Abelian stabilizer problem,” arXiv:quant-ph/9511026.Google Scholar
  27. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang (2019). Quantum computation and quantum information. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Quantum AI team and collaborators (2020). “qsim,” Sep. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4023103.Google Scholar
  29. https://github.com/Noah-Kerzner/qudit-Dicke-state-preparation.Google Scholar
  30. W. Zi, J. Nie and X. Sun, “Constant-Depth Quantum Circuits for Arbitrary Quantum State Preparation via Measurement and Feedback,” arXiv:2503.16208 [quant-ph].Google Scholar
  31. K. C. Smith, E. Crane, N. Wiebe and S. M. Girvin (2023). “Deterministic Constant-Depth Preparation of the AKLT State on a Quantum Processor Using Fusion Measurements,” PRX Quantum 4 no. 2, 020315, arXiv:2210.17548 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.020315Google Scholar
  32. E. Bäumer, V. Tripathi, D. S. Wang, P. Rall, E. H. Chen, S. Majumder, A. Seif and Z. K. Minev (2024). “Efficient Long-Range Entanglement Using Dynamic Circuits,” PRX Quantum 5 no. 3, 030339, arXiv:2308.13065 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030339Google Scholar
  33. E. Bäumer and S. Woerner (2025). “Measurement-based long-range entangling gates in constant depth,” Phys. Rev. Res. 7 no. 2, 023120, arXiv:2408.03064 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.023120Google Scholar
  34. H. Yeo, H. E. Kim, I. Sohn and K. Jeong (2025). “Reducing circuit depth in quantum state preparation for quantum simulation using measurements and feedforward,” Phys. Rev. Applied 23 no. 5, 054066, arXiv:2501.02929 [quant-ph].DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.23.054066Google Scholar