Back to News
quantum-computing

The unbearable hardness of deciding about magic

arXiv Quantum Physics
Loading...
4 min read
0 likes
⚡ Quantum Brief
Researchers proved that determining whether a quantum state belongs to the stabilizer polytope—a key benchmark for "magic" in quantum computing—requires super-exponential time, scaling as exp(n²) for n qubits. The team reduced the problem to a 3-SAT instance with n² variables, leveraging the exponential time hypothesis to establish fundamental intractability for both exact and approximate solutions. Consequences include the super-exponential hardness of computing any magic monotone or validating magic witnesses, revealing intrinsic limits in quantifying and certifying magic as a computational resource. Even classically simulable regimes remain intractable: verifying states generated by logarithmic-depth non-Clifford circuits is equally hard, closing avenues for efficient classical verification of quantum advantage. The findings underscore magic’s robustness as a resource while exposing computational barriers to distilling, simulating, or exploiting non-stabilizer states—critical for universal quantum computation.
The unbearable hardness of deciding about magic

Summarize this article with:

Quantum Physics arXiv:2602.22330 (quant-ph) [Submitted on 25 Feb 2026] Title:The unbearable hardness of deciding about magic Authors:Lorenzo Leone, Jens Eisert, Salvatore F.E. Oliviero View a PDF of the paper titled The unbearable hardness of deciding about magic, by Lorenzo Leone and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Identifying the boundary between classical and quantum computation is a central challenge in quantum information. In multi-qubit systems, entanglement and magic are the key resources underlying genuinely quantum behaviour. While entanglement is well understood, magic -- essential for universal quantum computation -- remains relatively poorly characterised. Here we show that determining membership in the stabilizer polytope, which defines the free states of magic-state resource theory, requires super-exponential time $\exp( n^2)$ in the number of qubits $n$, even approximately. We reduce the problem to solving a $3$-SAT instance on $n^2$ variables and, by invoking the exponential time hypothesis, the result follows. As a consequence, both quantifying and certifying magic are fundamentally intractable: any magic monotone for general states must be super-exponentially hard to compute, and deciding whether an operator is a valid magic witness is equally difficult. As a corollary, we establish the robustness of magic as computationally optimal among monotones. This barrier extends even to classically simulable regimes: deciding whether a state lies in the convex hull of states generated by a logarithmic number of non-Clifford gates is also super-exponentially hard. Together, these results reveal intrinsic computational limits on assessing classical simulability, distilling pathological magic states, and ultimately probing and exploiting magic as a quantum resource. Comments: Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) Cite as: arXiv:2602.22330 [quant-ph] (or arXiv:2602.22330v1 [quant-ph] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.22330 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Lorenzo Leone [view email] [v1] Wed, 25 Feb 2026 19:00:26 UTC (363 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled The unbearable hardness of deciding about magic, by Lorenzo Leone and 1 other authorsView PDFHTML (experimental)TeX Source view license Current browse context: quant-ph new | recent | 2026-02 References & Citations INSPIRE HEP NASA ADSGoogle Scholar Semantic Scholar export BibTeX citation Loading... BibTeX formatted citation × loading... Data provided by: Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) Links to Code Toggle Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Read Original

Tags

quantum-hardware

Source Information

Source: arXiv Quantum Physics