Edukaizen

Menu
  • News
  • Hubbard 1D
    • Part 1: 1D Hubbard model
    • Part 2: Snake layout and fSWAP
    • Part 3: Qiskit and Fire Opal
    • Part 4: 120-qubit run
    • Part 5: Time-to-answer
    • Part 6: Tensor networks
    • Part 7: Majorana propagation
    • Part 8: Reading heatmaps
    • Part 9: Digital vs cold-atom labs
    • Part 10: Official Monoprop benchmark
  • Hubbard 2D
    • Part 1: 1D to 2D
    • Part 2: Cuprates
    • Part 3: 3×3
    • Part 4: Time
    • Part 5: 4×4
    • Part 6: 6×6 Fez
  • Hadron
    • Part 1: Hadron on a quantum processor
    • Part 2: Quarks and confinement
    • Part 3: SU(2) and LSH
    • Part 4: Hamiltonian and circuit
    • Part 5: Fire Opal
    • Part 6: Classical simulations
    • Part 7: Quantum advantage
  • Black Hole OLE
    • Part 1: What we ran
    • Part 2: How OLE works
    • Part 3: Fire Opal and Kingston
    • Part 4: The tensor-network challenge
    • Part 5: Hawking and scrambling
    • Part 6: What the result proves
    • Part 7: Local toy model
    • Part 8: QGSS26 compatibility
  • Random Graph
    • Start here
    • Part 1: Theory
    • Part 2: Circuit
    • Part 3: Qiskit
    • Part 4: Complexity
    • Part 5: Verification
    • Part 6: Workflow
    • Part 7: Conclusion
  • QOS QML
    • Tutorial: UMI counts to a four-qubit circuit
    • Part 1: The QML task
    • Part 2: QOS theory
    • Part 3: Gene expression to 40 qubits
    • Part 4: JAX to hardware
    • Part 5: Readout and classifier
    • Part 6: 40-qubit result
    • Part 7: Route to quantum advantage
    • Part 8: 60-qubit result
  • Floquet-Ising
    • Part 1: Floquet physics
    • Part 2: Ising cycle
    • Part 3: Two-qubit toy model
    • Part 4: Oscillation and entanglement
    • Part 5: Noise and error mitigation
    • Part 6: Toward 51 qubits
  • Work
    • Quantum Gold
      • Part 1: Why gold is a relativistic quantum problem
      • Part 2: Why the 2025 gold VQE study stalled
      • Part 3: From QE and spin–orbit coupling to Qiskit
      • Part 4: Twelve gold spinor modes on four qubits
      • Part 5: The 24-qubit route: an active window for transport
      • Part 6: 24 qubits on IBM and with Fire Opal
      • Part 7: The road to quantum advantage for gold
      • Part 8: 24 gold spinor modes on IBM with ZNE-PEA
      • Part 9: Forced gold colour on 56 qubits
    • HaPPY Gravity
      • Part 1: Gravity as a phase gate
      • Part 2: Bosons and convergence
      • Part 3: The dynamic HaPPY benchmark
      • Part 4: The N=145 classical audit
      • Part 5: MPS and Majorana baselines
      • Part 6: PEA/ZNE and the decisive test
    • Fibonacci Anyons
      • Part 1: Fusion and braiding
      • Part 2: The 3/5/9-qubit ladder
      • Part 3: Why nine qubits were too deep
      • Part 4: Structure-aware simplification
      • Part 5: IBM hardware diagnostic
      • Part 6: Results and open questions
  • Advantage List
Menu

The two-qubit toy model worked out in full

Previous part | Series hub | Next part

Nederlands

Part 3 of the Floquet-Ising series: from two qubits to prethermal oscillations

A toy model is truly educational only when it does not disappear behind a simulator. With two qubits, the state has four amplitudes. The complete Floquet cycle is a four-by-four matrix, and every measurement probability can be checked with ordinary linear algebra.

The basis and initial state

We use the computational basis in the order |00>, |01>, |10>, |11>. The initial state is

\[
|\psi_0\rangle=|00\rangle=
\begin{pmatrix}1\\0\\0\\0\end{pmatrix}.
\]

A rotation around a Pauli axis P has the compact form

\[
R_P(\theta)=e^{-i\theta P/2}
=\cos\!\left(\frac{\theta}{2}\right)I
-i\sin\!\left(\frac{\theta}{2}\right)P,
\]

because P squared equals I. For two independent qubits, we take the tensor product RX times RX or RZ times RZ. For the interaction, we use P = Z times Z.

The seven gates in one cycle

With A = RX(theta-x) times RX(theta-x), B = RZ(theta-z) times RZ(theta-z), and C = RZZ(theta-zz), the time order is A, B, C, A, B, A, B. The composite Floquet matrix is therefore

\[
U_F = B A B A C B A.
\]

The rightmost A acts first on the state. This notation prevents a common mistake: a circuit diagram is often read from left to right, while matrix products act from right to left.

The parameters of the educational reduction are

\[
\theta_x=\frac{\pi}{6},
\qquad
\theta_z=\frac{\pi}{27},
\qquad
\theta_{zz}=\frac{\pi}{3}.
\]

From amplitudes to probabilities

After one cycle, we calculate

\[
|\psi_1\rangle=U_F|\psi_0\rangle
=a_{00}|00\rangle+a_{01}|01\rangle
+a_{10}|10\rangle+a_{11}|11\rangle.
\]

The phases of the amplitudes matter for later interference. In a direct Z measurement, we see only the Born probabilities Pxy = |axy|². The exact code gives

Bit string Probability after cycle 1
00 0.453879
01 0.186641
10 0.186641
11 0.172838

The sum is one, up to rounding. The equality P01 = P10 follows from the exchange symmetry of the two identical qubits and the symmetric initial state.

Magnetization without matrix multiplication

The magnetization operator is

\[
\hat M=\frac{Z_0+Z_1}{2}.
\]

The states |01> and |10> contribute zero to the average: one spin points up and the other down. |00> contributes +1 and |11> contributes -1. Therefore

\[
M(1)=P_{00}-P_{11}
=0.453879-0.172838
=0.281041.
\]

This is a useful check because we can obtain the same number in three ways: from the operator expectation value, directly from the probabilities, and with an independent Qiskit statevector.

Entanglement from a two-by-two matrix

Arrange the four amplitudes as a coefficient matrix

\[
A=\begin{pmatrix}a_{00}&a_{01}\\a_{10}&a_{11}\end{pmatrix}.
\]

When we trace out qubit 1, the reduced density matrix for qubit 0 is rho0 = A A-dagger. With eigenvalues lambda1 and lambda2, the entanglement entropy is

\[
S=-\sum_k \lambda_k\log_2\lambda_k.
\]

For a product state, S = 0. For a maximally entangled two-qubit state, S = 1 bit. After the first cycle, we find approximately 0.093 bit: the interaction has created entanglement, but not the maximum amount.

Why the exact implementation is small but valuable

The NumPy code constructs the gates from Pauli matrices, multiplies the state, and evaluates the observables. There is no sampling noise: all amplitudes are available. The Qiskit route independently constructs the same circuit. Regression tests require the two calculations to agree numerically.

state = |00>
for cycle in 0..N:
    measure exact M and S
    state = U_F @ state

This simplicity exposes errors that are easily hidden in a large experiment: gate order, sign conventions, qubit endianness, the factor of one-half in rotations, and the mapping from bit strings to Z eigenvalues.

The limit of four amplitudes

For N qubits, a dense state contains 2 to the power N amplitudes. Four amplitudes are manageable; at 51 qubits, there are more than two quadrillion. The mathematics of one gate does not change, but the classical storage requirement does.

The toy model is therefore both a physical teaching model and a software oracle. It tells us exactly what the implementation must do in a case that needs no approximation. In part 4, we use the full trajectory to read magnetization and entanglement side by side.

Run it yourself

python -m floquet_qem run --cycles 12 --out .
python -m floquet_qem qiskit-check --cycles 12

View the exact implementation.

Previous part | Series hub | Next part

Recent Posts

  • Quantum computing-nieuws — 28 augustus 2026
  • Quantum computing-nieuws — 27 augustus 2026
  • Quantum computing-nieuws — 26 augustus 2026
  • Quantum computing-nieuws — 25 augustus 2026
  • Quantum computing-nieuws — 24 augustus 2026

Recent Comments

No comments to show.

Archives

  • August 2026
  • July 2026
  • May 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • September 2024

Categories

  • 10
  • Quantum Computing
  • Uncategorized
©2026 Edukaizen | Theme by SuperbThemes