Cited by 138Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum optics and atomic interactions

Repeat-until-success quantum computing using stationary and flying qubits

Open access
Lim, Yuan Liang, Barrett, Sean D., Beige, Almut, Kok, Pieter, Kwek, Leong Chuan·2006·Physical Review A

Abstract

We introduce an architecture for robust and scalable quantum computation using both stationary qubits (e.g., single photon sources made out of trapped atoms, molecules, ions, quantum dots, or defect centers in solids) and flying qubits (e.g., photons). Our scheme solves some of the most pressing problems in existing nonhybrid proposals, which include the difficulty of scaling conventional stationary qubit approaches, and the lack of practical means for storing single photons in linear optics setups. We combine elements of two previous proposals for distributed quantum computing, namely the efficient photon-loss tolerant build up of cluster states by Barrett and Kok [Phys. Rev. A 71, 060310(R) (2005)] with the idea of repeat-until-success (RUS) quantum computing by Lim et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 030505 (2005)]. This idea can be used to perform eventually deterministic two qubit logic gates on spatially separated stationary qubits via photon pair measurements. Under nonideal conditions, where photon loss is a possibility, the resulting gates can still be used to build graph states for one-way quantum computing. In this paper, we describe the RUS method, present possible experimental realizations, and analyze the generation of graph states.

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 · 10.1103/physreva.73.012304

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A combination of the circuit and cluster approaches, where error encoding is achieved using cluster techniques but the computation proceeds via conventional CNOT gates, has been described.

    “It is not yet known whether the circuit or cluster model (or some other approach) is most promising; indeed a combination of these approaches where error encoding is achieved using cluster techniques but the computation proceeds via conventional CNOT gates has been described [49].”

    From Optical Quantum Computing (2007) · cites this paper as [49]

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 81 · Cited by 138

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. [19]L.K. Grover, Bell Labs Technical Memorandum No. ITD96-30115J, quant-ph/9607024 (1996). · arXiv
  2. Cirac, P. Zoller, M.D. Lukin, and A. Imamoglu, cond-mat/0407640 (2004). · arXiv
  3. [27]M.N. Leuenberger, M.E. Flatte, and D.D. Awschalom, cond-mat/0407499 (2004). · arXiv
  4. [42]I.E. Protsenko, G. Reymond, N. Schlosser, and P. Grangier, Phys. Rev. A 66 , 062306 (2002); N. Schlosser, I.E. Protsenko, and P. Grangier, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 361 , 1527 (2003).
  5. [46]M. Weber, PhD Thesis, Ludwig-Maximilian-Universit¨ at M¨ unchen (2005).
  6. [55]W.K. Wootters and B.D. Fields, Annals of Physics, 191 , 363 (1989).
  7. [62]D. DiVincenzo, in Scalable quantum computers; paving the way to realization , S.L. Braunstein and H.-K. Lo (Eds.) Wiley-VCH, Berlin (2001).
  8. [71]M. Varnava, D.E. Browne, and T. Rudolph, quant-ph/0507036 (2005). · arXiv
  9. [80]S.C. Benjamin, quant-ph/0504111 (2005). · arXiv
  10. [82]Q. Chen, J. Cheng, K.-L. Wang, and J. Du, quant-ph/0507066 (2004). · arXiv
  11. [83]M. A. Nielsen, Rev. Math. Phys. (in press); quant-ph/0504097 (2005). · arXiv

Authors
Lim, Y. L., Barrett, S. D., Beige, A., Kok, P., & Kwek, L. C.
Affiliations
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Hewlett-Packard (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
Venue
Physical Review A
Published
2006-01-09
Volume
73
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1050-2947
  • 1094-1622
OpenAlex
W2038473943
Cited by
138
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
27.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
  • NIE Digital Repository (National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
Keywords
flying qubits, single-photon sources, cluster states, graph states, one-way quantum computation, distributed quantum computing, quantum dot qubits, trapped ions

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