Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing Superconducting Qubits

Optimized controlled Z gates for two superconducting qubits coupled through a resonator

arXiv
Authors: D. J. Egger, F. K. Wilhelm

Year

2013

Paper ID

8320

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

108

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Superconducting qubits are a promising candidate for building a quantum computer. A continued challenge for fast yet accurate gates to minimize the effects of decoherence. Here we apply numerical methods to design fast entangling gates, specifically the controlled Z, in an architecture where two qubits are coupled via a resonator. We find that the gates can be sped up by a factor of two and reach any target fidelity. We also discuss how systematic errors arising from experimental conditions affect the pulses and how to remedy them, providing a strategy for the experimental implementation of our results. We discuss the shape of the pulses, their spectrum and symmetry.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Superconducting Qubits research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2013 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Superconducting qubits are a promising candidate for building a quantum computer.

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 #8320 #78837 TLS loss in superconducting res... #78829 Graphene double quantum dot as ... #78817 Modelling Josephson Junctions w... #78809 A quasiparticle-protected super...

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.