Cited by 31Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Mechanics and Applications

Probing Qubit Memory Errors at the Part-per-Million Level

Open access
Sepiol, M. A., Hughes, A. C., Tarlton, J. E., Nadlinger, D. P., Ballance, T. G., Ballance, C. J., Harty, T. P., Steane, A. M. +2 more·2019·Physical Review Letters

Abstract

Robust qubit memory is essential for quantum computing, both for near-term devices operating without error correction, and for the long-term goal of a fault-tolerant processor. We directly measure the memory error ${\ensuremath{\epsilon}}_{m}$ for a $^{43}{\mathrm{Ca}}^{+}$ trapped-ion qubit in the small-error regime and find ${\ensuremath{\epsilon}}_{m}<{10}^{\ensuremath{-}4}$ for storage times $t\ensuremath{\lesssim}50\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{ms}$. This exceeds gate or measurement times by three orders of magnitude. Using randomized benchmarking, at $t=1\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{ms}$ we measure ${\ensuremath{\epsilon}}_{m}=1.2(7)\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}6}$, around ten times smaller than that extrapolated from the ${T}_{2}^{*}$ time, and limited by instability of the atomic clock reference used to benchmark the qubit.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevlett.123.110503

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 expected scaling of memory error with delay time varies depending on the timescale of the noise sources.

    “The expected scaling of memory error with delay time varies depending on the timescale of the noise sources97.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sepiol, M. A., Hughes, A. C., Tarlton, J. E., Nadlinger, D. P., Ballance, T. G., Ballance, C. J., Harty, T. P., Steane, A. M., Goodwin, J. F., & Lucas, D. M.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Published
2019-09-13
Volume
123
Issue
11
Pages
110503-110503
ISSN
  • 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1079-7114
OpenAlex
W2945068789
Cited by
31
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Imperial College London
  • Army Research Office (W911NF-14-1-0217)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
Keywords
trapped-ion qubits, randomized benchmarking, T2 relaxation, quantum memory, fault-tolerant quantum computing

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