Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 490

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Stabilizing Rabi oscillations in a superconducting qubit using quantum feedback

Open access
Vijay, R., Macklin, C., Slichter, D. H., Weber, S. J., Murch, K. W., Naik, R., Korotkov, A. N., Siddiqi, I.·2012·Nature
DOI 10.1038/nature11505
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The act of measurement bridges the quantum and classical worlds by projecting a superposition of possible states into a single (probabilistic) outcome. The timescale of this ‘instantaneous’ process can be stretched using weak measurements, such that it takes the form of a gradual random walk towards a final state. Remarkably, the interim measurement record is sufficient to continuously track and steer the quantum state using feedback. Here we implement quantum feedback control in a solid-state system, namely a superconducting quantum bit (qubit) coupled to a microwave cavity. A weak measurement of the qubit is implemented by probing the cavity with microwave photons, maintaining its average occupation at less than one photon. These photons are then directed to a high-bandwidth, quantum-noise-limited amplifier, which allows real-time monitoring of the state of the cavity (and, hence, that of the qubit) with high fidelity. We demonstrate quantum feedback control by inhibiting the decay of Rabi oscillations, allowing them to persist indefinitely. Such an ability permits the active suppression of decoherence and enables a method of quantum error correction based on weak continuous measurements. Other applications include quantum state stabilization, entanglement generation using measurement, state purification and adaptive measurements.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature11505

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Wiseman, H. M. & Milburn, G. J. Quantum Measurement and Control (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009) · DOI · Paper page
  2. Gardiner, C. W. & Zoller, P. Quantum Noise (Springer, 2004)
  3. Wiseman, H. M. & Milburn, G. J. Quantum theory of optical feedback via homodyne detection. Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 548–551 (1993) · DOI · Paper page
  4. Hofmann, H. F., Mahler, G. & Hess, O. Quantum control of atomic systems by homodyne detection and feedback. Phys. Rev. A 57, 4877–4888 (1998) · DOI
  5. Korotkov, A. N. Selective quantum evolution of a qubit state due to continuous measurement. Phys. Rev. B 63, 115403 (2001) · DOI · Paper page
  6. Smith, W. P., Reiner, J. E., Orozco, L. A., Kuhr, S. & Wiseman, H. M. Capture and release of a conditional state of a cavity QED system by quantum feedback. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 133601 (2002) · DOI
  7. Gillett, G. G. et al. Experimental feedback control of quantum systems using weak measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 080503 (2010) · DOI
  8. Sayrin, C. et al. Real-time quantum feedback prepares and stabilizes photon number states. Nature 477, 73–77 (2011) · DOI · Paper page
  9. Blais, A., Huang, R.-S., Wallraff, A., Girvin, S. M. & Schoelkopf, R. J. Cavity quantum electrodynamics for superconducting electrical circuits: an architecture for quantum computation. Phys. Rev. A 69, 062320 (2004) · DOI · Paper page
  10. Hatridge, M., Vijay, R., Slichter, D. H., Clarke, J. & Siddiqi, I. Dispersive magnetometry with a quantum limited SQUID parametric amplifier. Phys. Rev. B 83, 134501 (2011) · DOI · Paper page
  11. Vijay, R., Slichter, D. H. & Siddiqi, I. Observation of quantum jumps in a superconducting artificial atom. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 110502 (2011) · DOI · Paper page
  12. Ruskov, R. & Korotkov, A. N. Quantum feedback control of a solid-state qubit. Phys. Rev. B 66, 041401 (2002) · doi:10.1103/physrevb.66.041401
  13. Ahn, C., Doherty, A. C. & Landahl, A. J. Continuous quantum error correction via quantum feedback control. Phys. Rev. A 65, 042301, 2002. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Tornberg, L. & Johansson, G. High-fidelity feedback-assisted parity measurement in circuit QED. Phys. Rev. A 82, 012329 (2010) · DOI
  15. Wang, J. & Wiseman, H. M. Feedback-stabilization of an arbitrary pure state of a two-level atom. Phys. Rev. A 64, 063810 (2001) · DOI · Paper page
  16. Ruskov, R. & Korotkov, A. N. Entanglement of solid-state qubits by measurement. Phys. Rev. B 67, 241305 (2003) · DOI
  17. Combes, J. & Jacobs, K. Rapid state reduction of quantum systems using feedback control. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 010504 (2006) · DOI
  18. Jacobs, K. Feedback control for communication with non-orthogonal states. Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 127–138 (2007)
  19. Cook, R. L., Martin, P. J. & Geremia, J. M. Optical coherent state discrimination using a closed-loop quantum measurement. Nature 446, 774–777 (2007) · DOI · Paper page
  20. Schrödinger, E. The present situation in quantum mechanics. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 124, 323–338 (1980)
  21. Clerk, A. A., Devoret, M. H., Girvin, S. M., Marquardt, F. & Schoelkopf, R. J. Introduction to quantum noise, measurement, and amplification. Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1155–1208 (2010) · DOI · Paper page
  22. Paik, H. et al. Observation of high coherence in Josephson junction qubits measured in a three-dimensional circuit QED architecture. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 240501 (2011) · DOI · Paper page
  23. Koch, J. et al. Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the Cooper pair box. Phys. Rev. A 76, 042319 (2007) · DOI · Paper page
  24. Wallraff, A. et al. Approaching unit visibility for control of a superconducting qubit with dispersive readout. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 060501 (2005) · DOI · Paper page
  25. Schuster, D. I. et al. ac Stark shift and dephasing of a superconducting qubit strongly coupled to a cavity field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 123602 (2005) · DOI · Paper page
  26. Palacios-Laloy, A. et al. Experimental violation of a Bell’s inequality in time with weak measurement. Nature Phys. 6, 442–447 (2010) · DOI · Paper page
  27. Korotkov, A. N. & Averin, D. V. Continuous weak measurement of quantum coherent oscillations. Phys. Rev. B 64, 165310 (2001) · DOI · Paper page
  28. Steffen, M. et al. State tomography of capacitively shunted phase qubits with high fidelity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 050502 (2006) · DOI · Paper page
  29. Slichter, D. H. et al. Measurement-induced qubit state mixing in circuit QED from upconverted dephasing noise. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1206.6946 (2012) · DOI

Cited by

See all 490

Metadata

Authors
Vijay, R., Macklin, C., Slichter, D. H., Weber, S. J., Murch, K. W., Naik, R., Korotkov, A. N., & Siddiqi, I.
Venue
Nature
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-10
Volume
490
Issue
7418
Pages
77-80
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
DOI
10.1038/nature11505
OpenAlex
W1992078191
Cited by
490
References
0
FWCI
44.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stabilizing Rabi oscillations in a superconducting qubit using quantum feedback. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nature11505
The paper
Vijay, R., Macklin, C., Slichter, D. H., Weber, S. J., Murch, K. W., Naik, R., Korotkov, A. N., & Siddiqi, I. (2012). Stabilizing Rabi oscillations in a superconducting qubit using quantum feedback. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11505

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.