The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Three-Qubit Randomized Benchmarking
Open accessAbstract
As quantum circuits increase in size, it is critical to establish scalable multiqubit fidelity metrics. Here we investigate, for the first time, three-qubit randomized benchmarking (RB) on a quantum device consisting of three fixed-frequency transmon qubits with pairwise microwave-activated interactions (cross-resonance). We measure a three-qubit error per Clifford of 0.106 for all-to-all gate connectivity and 0.207 for linear gate connectivity. Furthermore, by introducing mixed dimensionality simultaneous RB-simultaneous one- and two-qubit RB-we show that the three-qubit errors can be predicted from the one- and two-qubit errors. However, by introducing certain coherent errors to the gates, we can increase the three-qubit error to 0.302, an increase that is not predicted by a proportionate increase in the one- and two-qubit errors from simultaneous RB. This demonstrates the importance of multiqubit metrics, such as three-qubit RB, on evaluating overall device performance.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
“Methods such as randomized benchmarking [5], state and process tomography [6], and gateset tomography [7] are valued for measuring the performance of operations on a few qubits, yet they fail to account for errors arising from interactions with spectator qubits [8, 9].”
From Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits (2019) · cites this paper as [8]
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
Quantum computation and quantum information
Law, J. (2001) · ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · doi:10.1145/505482.505499 · Cited by 20,450
Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation
Fowler, A. G., Mariantoni, M., Martinis, J. M., & Cleland, A. N. (2012) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.86.032324 · Cited by 3,059 · cited 1×
“Surface codes are predicted to have a high threshold for correcting errors, but they are typically simulated with correlated noise only between qubits for which there is a direct gate [3].”
BackgroundSuperconducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance
Barends, R., Kelly, J., Megrant, A., Veitia, A., Sank, D., Jeffrey, E., White, T. C., Mutus, J., Fowler, A. G., Campbell, B., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13171 · Cited by 1,733
Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits
Aaronson, S., & Gottesman, D. (2004) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.70.052328 · Cited by 1,515
Quantum State Tomography via Compressed Sensing
Gross, D., Liu, Y.-K., Flammia, S. T., Becker, S., & Eisert, J. (2010) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.150401 · Cited by 1,133
Randomized benchmarking of quantum gates
Knill, E., Leibfried, D., Reichle, R., Britton, J., Blakestad, R. B., Jost, J. D., Langer, C., Ozeri, R., Seidelin, S., & Wineland, D. J. (2008) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.77.012307 · Cited by 1,019
An addressable quantum dot qubit with fault-tolerant control-fidelity
Veldhorst, M., Hwang, J. C. C., Yang, C. H., Leenstra, A., de Ronde, B., Dehollain, J. P., Muhonen, J. T., Hudson, F. E., Itoh, K. M., Morello, A., et al. (2014) · Nature Nanotechnology · doi:10.1038/nnano.2014.216 · Cited by 957
Prescription for experimental determination of the dynamics of a quantum black box
Chuang, I. L., & Nielsen, M. A. (1997) · Journal of Modern Optics · doi:10.1080/09500349708231894 · Cited by 949
Simple Pulses for Elimination of Leakage in Weakly Nonlinear Qubits
Motzoi, F., Gambetta, J. M., Rebentrost, P., & Wilhelm, F. K. (2009) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.110501 · Cited by 814
Self-citationScalable and Robust Randomized Benchmarking of Quantum Processes
Magesan, E., Gambetta, J., & Emerson, J. (2011) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.180504 · Cited by 797
Self-citation
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
Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits
Cross, A. W., Bishop, L. S., Sheldon, S., Nation, P. D., & Gambetta, J. M. (2019) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.100.032328 · Cited by 704
Self-citationSuppression of Qubit Crosstalk in a Tunable Coupling Superconducting Circuit
Mundada, P., Zhang, G., Hazard, T., & Houck, A. (2019) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.12.054023 · Cited by 268
Characterizing large-scale quantum computers via cycle benchmarking
Erhard, A., Wallman, J. J., Postler, L., Meth, M., Stricker, R., Martinez, E. A., Schindler, P., Monz, T., Emerson, J., & Blatt, R. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13068-7 · Cited by 254
Detecting crosstalk errors in quantum information processors
Sarovar, M., Proctor, T. J., Rudinger, K., Young, K., Nielsen, E., & Blume-Kohout, R. (2020) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2020-09-11-321 · Cited by 292
Metadata
- Authors
- McKay, D. C., Sheldon, S., Smolin, J. A., Chow, J. M., & Gambetta, J. M.
- Affiliations
- IBM Research - Thomas J. Watson Research Center (US)
- Venue
- Physical Review Letters
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2019-05-23
- Volume
- 122
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 200502-200502
- ISSN
- 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
- 1079-7114
- OpenAlex
- W2776564547
- Cited by
- 156
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 12
- FWCI
- 10.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Army Research Office (W911NF-14-1-0124)
- 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 many-body systems
- Keywords
- transmon qubits, cross-resonance gate, coherent errors
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
