Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Extended orbital modeling of spin qubits in double quantum dots
arXiv
Authors: Zack White, Guy Ramon
Year
2017
Paper ID
25042
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
116
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Orbital modeling of two electron spins confined in a double quantum dot is revisited. We develop an extended Hund Mulliken approach that includes excited orbitals, allowing for a triplet configuration with both electrons residing in a single dot. This model improves the reliability and applicability of the standard Hund Mulliken approximation, while remaining largely analytical, thus it enables us to identify the mechanisms behind the exchange coupling dynamics that we find. In particular, our calculations are in close agreement with exchange values that were recently measured at a high interdot bias regime, where the double occupancy triplet configuration is energetically accessible, demonstrating reduced sensitivity to bias fluctuations, while maintaining the large exchange needed for fast gating.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2017 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Orbital modeling of two electron spins confined in a double quantum dot is revisited.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
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.