Quick Navigation
Topics
Benchmarking Verification Validation
Quantum Error Correction Fault Tolerance
Quantum Gate Fidelity Benchmarking
A biased-erasure cavity qubit with hardware-efficient quantum error detection
arXiv
Authors: Jiasheng Mai, Qiyu Liu, Xiaowei Deng, Yanyan Cai, Zhongchu Ni, Libo Zhang, Ling Hu, Pan Zheng, Song Liu, Yuan Xu, Dapeng Yu
Year
2026
Paper ID
3136
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
207
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Erasure qubits are beneficial for quantum error correction due to their relaxed threshold requirements. While dual-rail erasure qubits have been demonstrated with a strong error hierarchy in circuit quantum electrodynamics, biased-erasure qubits - where erasures originate predominantly from one logical basis state - offer further advantages. Here, we realize a hardware-efficient biased-erasure qubit encoded in the vacuum and two-photon Fock states of a single microwave cavity. The qubit exhibits an erasure bias ratio of over 265. By using a transmon ancilla for logical measurements and mid-circuit erasure detections, we achieve logical state assignment errors below 1% and convert over 99.3% leakage errors into detected erasures. After postselection against erasures, we achieve effective logical relaxation and dephasing rates of $\(6.2 \mathrm{ms}\)^{-1}$ and $\(3.1 \mathrm{ms}\)^{-1}$, respectively, which exceed the erasure error rate by factors of 31 and 15, establishing a strong error hierarchy within the logical subspace. These postselected error rates indicate a coherence gain of about 6.0 beyond the break-even point set by the best physical qubit encoded in the two lowest Fock states in the cavity. Moreover, randomized benchmarking with interleaved erasure detections reveals a residual logical gate error of 0.29%. This work establishes a compact and hardware-efficient platform for biased-erasure qubits, promising concatenations into outer-level stabilizer codes toward fault-tolerant quantum computation.
Paper Tools
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.