Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 260

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantum process tomography of a universal entangling gate implemented with Josephson phase qubits

Open access
Bialczak, R. C., Ansmann, M., Hofheinz, M., Lucero, E., Neeley, M., O’Connell, A. D., Sank, D., Wang, H., Wenner, J., Steffen, M., Cleland, A. N., Martinis, J. M.·2010·Nature Physics
DOI 10.1038/nphys1639
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Quantum process tomography provides a means of benchmarking the components and algorithms of a quantum computer in a quantitative fashion, independent of the particular architecture used. Such a procedure has now been demonstrated for a universal entangling gate in a solid-state system. Quantum gates must perform reliably when operating on standard input basis states and on complex superpositions thereof. Experiments using superconducting qubits have validated truth tables for particular implementations of, for example, the controlled-NOT gate1,2, but have not fully characterized gate operation for arbitrary superpositions of input states. Here we demonstrate the use of quantum process tomography3,4 (QPT) to fully characterize the performance of a universal entangling gate between two superconducting qubits. Process tomography permits complete gate analysis, but requires precise preparation of arbitrary input states, control over the subsequent qubit interaction and ideally simultaneous single-shot measurement of output states. In recent work, it has been proposed to use QPT to probe noise properties5 and time dynamics6 of qubit systems and to apply techniques from control theory to create scalable qubit benchmarking protocols7,8. We use QPT to measure the fidelity and noise properties5 of an entangling gate. In addition to demonstrating a promising fidelity, our entangling gate has an on-to-off ratio of 300, a level of adjustable coupling that will become a requirement for future high-fidelity devices. This is the first solid-state demonstration of QPT in a two-qubit system, as QPT has previously been demonstrated only with single solid-state qubits9,10,11.

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/nphys1639

Cites

33 of 33 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

Cited by

See all 260

Metadata

Authors
Bialczak, R. C., Ansmann, M., Hofheinz, M., Lucero, E., Neeley, M., O’Connell, A. D., Sank, D., Wang, H., Wenner, J., Steffen, M., Cleland, A. N., & Martinis, J. M.
Venue
Nature Physics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-04-25
Volume
6
Issue
6
Pages
409-413
ISSN
  • 1745-2473 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-2481
DOI
10.1038/nphys1639
OpenAlex
W2049737808
Cited by
260
References
33
FWCI
19.39
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

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.