Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Simulation
Experimental Quantum Hamiltonian Identification from Measurement Time Traces
arXiv
Authors: Shi-yao Hou, Hang Li, Gui-Lu Long
Year
2014
Paper ID
46982
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
99
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Identifying Hamiltonian of a quantum system is of vital importance for quantum information processing. In this Letter, we realized and benchmarked a quantum Hamiltonian identification algorithm recently proposed \[Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 080401 (2014)\]. we realized the algorithm on liquid nuclear magnetic resonance quantum information processor using two different working media with different forms of Hamiltonian. Our experiment realized the quantum identification algorithm based on free induction decay signals. We also showed how to process data obtained in practical experiment. We studied the influence of decoherence by numerical simulations. Our experiments and simulations demonstrate that the algorithm is effective and robust.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Identifying Hamiltonian of a quantum system is of vital importance for quantum information processing.
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.