Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing Superconducting Qubits

Robust manipulation of superconducting qubits in the presence of fluctuations

arXiv
Authors: Daoyi Dong, Chunlin Chen, Bo Qi, Ian R. Petersen, Franco Nori

Year

2014

Paper ID

48194

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

90

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Superconducting quantum systems are promising candidates for quantum information processing due to their scalability and design flexibility. However, the existence of defects, fluctuations, and inaccuracies is unavoidable for practical superconducting quantum circuits. In this paper, a sampling-based learning control (SLC) method is used to guide the design of control fields for manipulating superconducting quantum systems. Numerical results for one-qubit systems and coupled two-qubit systems show that the "smart" fields learned using the SLC method can achieve robust manipulation of superconducting qubits, even in the presence of large fluctuations and inaccuracies.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Superconducting Qubits research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Superconducting quantum systems are promising candidates for quantum information processing due to their scalability and design flexibility.

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

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #48194 #72999 Superconducting singlet-triplet... #72998 Majorana parity qubit in couple...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

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.