The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Demonstration of Fidelity Improvement Using Dynamical Decoupling with Superconducting Qubits
Open accessAbstract
Quantum computers must be able to function in the presence of decoherence. The simplest strategy for decoherence reduction is dynamical decoupling (DD), which requires no encoding overhead and works by converting quantum gates into decoupling pulses. Here, using the IBM and Rigetti platforms, we demonstrate that the DD method is suitable for implementation in today's relatively noisy and small-scale cloud-based quantum computers. Using DD, we achieve substantial fidelity gains relative to unprotected, free evolution of individual superconducting transmon qubits. To a lesser degree, DD is also capable of protecting entangled two-qubit states. We show that dephasing and spontaneous emission errors are dominant in these systems, and that different DD sequences are capable of mitigating both effects. Unlike previous work demonstrating the use of quantum error correcting codes on the same platforms, we make no use of postselection and hence report unconditional fidelity improvements against natural decoherence.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Recently, DD experiments were performed on the 16-qubit IBMQX5, 5-qubit IBMQX4, and the 19-qubit Rigetti Acorn chips (Pokharel et al. , 2018), where the gain in substantial gate fidelity relative to unprotected, free evolution of individual transmon qubits was demonstrated.”
From Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms (2022) · cites this paper as Pokharel et al., 2018
Citations
Cites
Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond
Preskill, J. (2018) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 · Cited by 8,830
Quantum computation with quantum dots
Loss, D., & DiVincenzo, D. P. (1998) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.57.120 · Cited by 6,840
Scully, M. O., & Zubairy, M. S. (1997) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511813993 · Cited by 6,589
A silicon-based nuclear spin quantum computer
Kane, B. E. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/30156 · Cited by 3,779
Quantum Computations with Cold Trapped Ions
Cirac, J. I., & Zoller, P. (1995) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.74.4091 · Cited by 3,733
Coherent control of macroscopic quantum states in a single-Cooper-pair box
Nakamura, Y., Pashkin, Y. A., & Tsai, J. S. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/19718 · Cited by 2,386
Dynamical Decoupling of Open Quantum Systems
Viola, L., Knill, E., & Lloyd, S. (1999) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.82.2417 · Cited by 1,808
The ‘transition probability’ in the state space of a—algebra
Uhlmann, A. (1976) · Reports on Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1016/0034-4877(76)90060-4 · Cited by 1,649
Dynamical suppression of decoherence in two-state quantum systems
Viola, L., & Lloyd, S. (1998) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.58.2733 · Cited by 1,617
Coherent control of macroscopic quantum states in a single-Cooper-pair box
Nakamura, Y., Pashkin, Y. A., & Tsai, J. S. (1999) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 1,509
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms
Bharti, K., Cervera-Lierta, A., Kyaw, T. H., Haug, T., Alperin-Lea, S., Anand, A., Degroote, M., Heimonen, H., Kottmann, J. S., Menke, T., et al. (2022) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.94.015004 · Cited by 2,231
A quantum engineer's guide to superconducting qubits
Krantz, P., Kjærgaard, M., Yan, F., Orlando, T. P., Gustavsson, S., & Oliver, W. D. (2019) · Applied Physics Reviews · doi:10.1063/1.5089550 · Cited by 2,321
Benchmarking an 11-qubit quantum computer
Wright, K., Beck, K. M., Debnath, S., Amini, J., Nam, Y., Grzesiak, N., Chen, J.-S., Pisenti, N. C., Chmielewski, M., Collins, C., et al. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13534-2 · Cited by 575
t|ket⟩: a retargetable compiler for NISQ devices
Sivarajah, S., Dilkes, S., Cowtan, A., Simmons, W., Edgington, A., & Duncan, R. (2021) · Quantum Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab8e92 · Cited by 475
Tannu, S. S., & Qureshi, M. K. (2019) · Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems · doi:10.1145/3297858.3304007 · Cited by 306
Metadata
- Authors
- Pokharel, B., Anand, N., Fortman, B., & Lidar, D. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- Venue
- Physical Review Letters
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2018-11-29
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 220502-220502
- ISSN
- 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
- 1079-7114
- OpenAlex
- W2884173913
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 15
- FWCI
- 7.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Bulletin of the American Physical Society
- Funders
- Oracle
- Lockheed Martin
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Keywords
- dynamical decoupling, superconducting qubits, transmon qubits, decoherence suppression, gate fidelity, dephasing, spontaneous emission, entanglement protection, two-qubit gates, IBM Quantum
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
