CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 109Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices

DISTRIBUTED QUANTUM COMPUTATION ARCHITECTURE USING SEMICONDUCTOR NANOPHOTONICS

Open access
VAN METER, RODNEY, LADD, THADDEUS D., FOWLER, AUSTIN G., YAMAMOTO, YOSHIHISA·2010·International Journal of Quantum Information
DOI 10.1142/s0219749910006435
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In a large-scale quantum computer, the cost of communications will dominate the performance and resource requirements, place many severe demands on the technology, and constrain the architecture. Unfortunately, fault-tolerant computers based entirely on photons with probabilistic gates, though equipped with "built-in" communication, have very large resource overheads; likewise, computers with reliable probabilistic gates between photons or quantum memories may lack sufficient communication resources in the presence of realistic optical losses. Here, we consider a compromise architecture, in which semiconductor spin qubits are coupled by bright laser pulses through nanophotonic waveguides and cavities using a combination of frequent probabilistic and sparse determinstic entanglement mechanisms. The large photonic resource requirements incurred by the use of probabilistic gates for quantum communication are mitigated in part by the potential high-speed operation of the semiconductor nanophotonic hardware. The system employs topological cluster-state quantum error correction for achieving fault-tolerance. Our results suggest that such an architecture/technology combination has the potential to scale to a system capable of attacking classically intractable computational problems.

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 · 10.1142/s0219749910006435

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • When factoring 2048-bit RSA integers, the construction's spacetime volume is a hundredfold less than comparable estimates from earlier works.

    “When factoring 2048 bit RSA integers, our construction's spacetime volume is a hundredfold less than comparable estimates from earlier works (Van Meter et al. 2009, Jones et al. 2010, Fowler et al. 2012, Gheorghiu et al. 2019).”

    From How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits (2021) · cites this paper as Van Meter et al. 2009

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: 23

  1. [1]1. D.P. DiVincenzo. The physical implementation of quantum computation. Fortschritte der Physik , 48(9-11):771-783, 2000.
  2. [4]4. Rodney Van Meter and Mark Oskin. Architectural implications of quantum computing technologies. ACMJournal of Emerging Technologies in Computing Systems , 2(1):31-63, January 2006.
  3. [6]6. Todd Brun, Igor Devetak, and Min-Hsiu Hsieh. Correcting quantum errors with entanglement. Science , 314(5798):436-439, 2006.
  4. [7]7. Dave Bacon and Andrea Casaccino. Quantum error correcting subsystem codes from two classical linear codes. quant-ph/0610088, October 2006. · arXiv
  5. [8]8. D. Bacon. Operator quantum error-correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories. Physical Review A , 73(1):12340, 2006.
  6. [9]9. D.J.C. MacKay, G. Mitchison, and P.L. McFadden. Sparse-graph codes for quantum error correction. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 50(10):2315, 2004.
  7. [11]11. Andrew M. Steane. Quantum computer architecture for fast entropy extraction. Quantum Information and Computation , 2(4):297-306, 2002. http://arxiv.org/quant-ph/0203047.
  8. [12]12. Simon J. Devitt, Austin G. Fowler, and Lloyd C. Hollenberg. Simulations of Shor's algorithm with implications to scaling and quantum error correction. http://arXiv.org/quant-ph/0408081, August 2004.
  9. [13]13. Dean Copsey, Mark Oskin, Tzvetan Metodiev, Frederic T. Chong, Isaac Chuang, and John Kubiatowicz. The effect of communication costs in solid-state quantum computing architectures. In Proceedings of the fifteenth annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures , pages 65-74, 2003.
  10. [14]14. T. Szkopek, P. O. Boykin, H. Fan, V. P. Roychowdhury, E. Yablonovitch, G. Simms, M. Gyure, and B. Fong. Threshold error penalty for fault-tolerant quantum computation with nearest neighbor communication. IEEE Trans. on Nanotech. , 5:42, 2006.
  11. [15]15. Darshan D. Thaker, Tzvetan Metodi, Andrew Cross, Isaac Chuang, and Frederic T. Chong. CQLA: Matching density to exploitable parallelism in quantum computing. In Computer Architecture News, Proc. 33rd Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture . ACM, June 2006.
  12. [16]16. Mark G. Whitney, Nemanja Isailovic, Yatish Patel, and John Kubiatowicz. A fault tolerant, area efficient architecture for Shor's factoring algorithm. In Proc. 36th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture , June 2009.
  13. [17]17. E. Collin, G. Ithier, A. Aassime, P. Joyez, D. Vion, and D. Esteve. NMR-like control of a quantum bit superconducting circuit. Physical Review Letters , 93:157005, October 2004.
  14. [19]19. D. A. Lidar, I. L. Chuang, and K. B. Whaley. Decoherence-free subspaces for quantum computation. Physical Review Letters , 81(12):2594-2597, September 1998.
  15. [20]20. Daniel A. Lidar and K. Birgitta Whaley. Irreversible Quantum Dynamics , volume 622 of Lecture Notes in Physics , chapter Decoherence-Free Subspaces and Subsystems. Springer, 2003.
  16. [23]23. Austin G. Fowler, Charles D. Hill, and Lloyd C. L. Hollenberg. Quantum error correction on linear nearest neighbor qubit arrays. Physical Review A , 69:042314, 2004.
  17. [25]25. C.H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J.A. Smolin, and W.K. Wootters. Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy channels. Physical Review Letters , 76(5):722-725, 1996.
  18. [26]26. J.I. Cirac, A. Ekert, S.F. Huelga, and C. Macchiavello. Distributed quantum computation over noisy channels. Physical Review A , 59:4249, 1999.
  19. [27]27. J. Dehaene, M. Van den Nest, B. De Moor, and F. Verstraete. Local permutations of products of Bell states and entanglement distillation. Physical Review A , 67(2):22310, 2003.
  20. [28]28. C. Kruszynska, A. Miyake, H.J. Briegel, and W. Dür. Entanglement purification protocols for all graph states. Physical Review A , 74(5):52316, 2006.
  21. [30]30. Rodney Van Meter, Thaddeus D. Ladd, W. J. Munro, and Kae Nemoto. System design for a long-line quantum repeater. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking , 17(3):1002-1013, June 2009.
  22. [31]31. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, R. Martinez, and C. Negrevergne. Benchmarking quantum computers: the five-qubit error correcting code. Physical Review Letters , 86(25):5811-5814, June 2001.
  23. [33]33. T.B. Pittman, B.C. Jacobs, and J.D. Franson. Demonstration of quantum error correction using linear optics. Physical Review A , page 052332, May 2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
VAN METER, R., LADD, T. D., FOWLER, A. G., & YAMAMOTO, Y.
Affiliations
  • Faculty of Environment and Information Studies, Keio University, 5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa, 252-8520, Japan
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Quantum Information
Publisher
World Scientific Pub Co Pte Ltd
Published
2010-02
Volume
08
Issue
01n02
Pages
295-323
ISSN
  • 0219-7499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1793-6918
DOI
10.1142/s0219749910006435
OpenAlex
W2044009751
Cited by
109
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 6
FWCI
10.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Quantum Information (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (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 › Semiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Keywords
distributed quantum computing, spin qubits, nanophotonic waveguides, quantum cavity, deterministic entanglement, quantum communication, fault tolerance, optical loss, quantum computing architecture

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