Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 916

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit

Open access
Kelly, J., Barends, R., Fowler, A. G., Megrant, A., Jeffrey, E., White, T. C., Sank, D., Mutus, J. Y., Campbell, B., Chen, Yu, Chen, Z., Chiaro, B., Dunsworth, A., Hoi, I.-C., Neill, C., O’Malley, P. J. J., Quintana, C., Roushan, P., Vainsencher, A., Wenner, J., Cleland, A. N., Martinis, John M.·2015·Nature

Abstract

Quantum computing becomes viable when a quantum state can be protected from environment-induced error. If quantum bits (qubits) are sufficiently reliable, errors are sparse and quantum error correction (QEC) is capable of identifying and correcting them. Adding more qubits improves the preservation of states by guaranteeing that increasingly larger clusters of errors will not cause logical failure—a key requirement for large-scale systems. Using QEC to extend the qubit lifetime remains one of the outstanding experimental challenges in quantum computing. Here we report the protection of classical states from environmental bit-flip errors and demonstrate the suppression of these errors with increasing system size. We use a linear array of nine qubits, which is a natural step towards the two-dimensional surface code QEC scheme, and track errors as they occur by repeatedly performing projective quantum non-demolition parity measurements. Relative to a single physical qubit, we reduce the failure rate in retrieving an input state by a factor of 2.7 when using five of our nine qubits and by a factor of 8.5 when using all nine qubits after eight cycles. Additionally, we tomographically verify preservation of the non-classical Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger state. The successful suppression of environment-induced errors will motivate further research into the many challenges associated with building a large-scale superconducting quantum computer.

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/nature14270

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 916

Metadata

Authors
Kelly, J., Barends, R., Fowler, A. G., Megrant, A., Jeffrey, E., White, T. C., Sank, D., Mutus, J. Y., Campbell, B., Chen, Y., Chen, Z., Chiaro, B., Dunsworth, A., Hoi, I.-C., Neill, C., O’Malley, P. J. J., Quintana, C., Roushan, P., Vainsencher, A., Wenner, J., Cleland, A. N., & Martinis, J. M.
Venue
Nature
Published
2015-03-04
Volume
519
Issue
7541
Pages
66-69
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2089540019
Cited by
916
References
27
FWCI
121.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nature14270
The paper
Kelly, J., Barends, R., Fowler, A. G., Megrant, A., Jeffrey, E., White, T. C., Sank, D., Mutus, J. Y., Campbell, B., Chen, Y., Chen, Z., Chiaro, B., Dunsworth, A., Hoi, I.-C., Neill, C., O’Malley, P. J. J., Quintana, C., Roushan, P., Vainsencher, A., . . . Martinis, J. M. (2015). State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14270

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.