Cited by 69Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureCold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein Condensates

Noise analysis for high-fidelity quantum entangling gates in an anharmonic linear Paul trap

Open access
Wu, Yukai, Wang, Sheng-Tao, Duan, L.-M.·2018·Physical Review A

Abstract

The realization of high-fidelity quantum gates in a multiqubit system, with a typical target set at $99.9%$, is a critical requirement for the implementation of fault-tolerant quantum computation. To reach this level of fidelity, one needs to carefully analyze the noises and imperfections in the experimental system and optimize the gate operations to mitigate their effects. Here, we consider one of the leading experimental systems for the fault-tolerant quantum computation, ions in an anharmonic linear Paul trap, and optimize entangling quantum gates using segmented laser pulses with the assistance of all the collective transverse phonon modes of the ion crystal. We present detailed analyses of the effects of various kinds of intrinsic experimental noises as well as errors from imperfect experimental controls. Through explicit calculations, we find the requirements on these relevant noise levels and control precisions to achieve the targeted high fidelity of $99.9%$ for the entangling quantum gates in a multi-ion crystal.

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.97.062325

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • The accumulation of physical errors prevents the execution of large-scale algorithms in current quantum computers.

    “The accumulation of physical errors1–3 prevents the execution of large-scale algorithms in current quantum computers.”

    From High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory (2024) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says important algorithms had been demonstrated only at small scale, and Appendix D (p. 18) describes errors accumulating over repeated gates and a coherence-time limit. These passages support errors as a scaling obstacle, but the paper does not establish that accumulated physical errors prevent large-scale algorithms on current quantum computers generally. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [19]D. J. Wineland, M. Barrett, J. Britton, J. Chiaverini, B. DeMarco, W. Itano, B. Jelenkovi´ c, C. Langer, D. Leibfried, V. Meyer, et al. , Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 361 , 1349 (2003).
  2. [21]P. J. Lee, K.-A. Brickman, L. Deslauriers, P. C. Haljan, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics 7 , S371 (2005).
  3. [22]M. A. Nielsen, Physics Letters A 303 , 249 (2002).
  4. [26]C. J. Trout, M. Li, M. Guti´ errez, Y. Wu, S.-T. Wang, L. Duan, and K. R. Brown, New Journal of Physics 20 , 043038 (2018).
  5. [28]H. Landa, M. Drewsen, B. Reznik, and A. Retzker, New Journal of Physics 14 , 093023 (2012).
  6. [33]Y. R. Sanders, J. J. Wallman, and B. C. Sanders, New Journal of Physics 18 , 012002 (2016).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, Y., Wang, S.-T., & Duan, L.-M.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Physical Review A
Published
2018-06-19
Volume
97
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
  • 2469-9926
  • 2469-9934
OpenAlex
W2786023959
Cited by
69
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity
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 › Cold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein Condensates
Keywords
high-fidelity quantum gates, trapped ions, noise analysis, control accuracy, fault-tolerant quantum computing, gate optimization

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