pith. sign in

arxiv: 2112.02568 · v2 · submitted 2021-12-05 · 🪐 quant-ph

Swap-test interferometry with biased ancilla noise

Ond\v{r}ej \v{C}ernot\'ik , Iivari Pietik\"ainen , Shruti Puri , S. M. Girvin , Radim Filip This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 13:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Mach-Zehnder interferometerHeisenberg scalingcontrolled-swap gatesswap testancilla noisephase estimationNOON statescircuit QED
0
0 comments X

The pith

Controlled-swap gates and ancilla measurements project simple input states onto entangled states to recover Heisenberg scaling in phase estimation.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that a modified Mach-Zehnder interferometer can reach Heisenberg-limited sensitivity to small phase shifts using easily prepared states such as Fock states or coherent states. It does so by replacing the usual linear mirrors with controlled-swap gates that couple the two arms to ancilla qubits, followed by ancilla measurements. These operations project the inputs onto NOON states or entangled coherent states. The work also analyzes how errors in the ancilla affect the projections and finds that noise biased toward phase flips preserves useful performance, supported by circuit-QED simulations.

Core claim

Heisenberg scaling can be recovered with simple input states when the linear mirrors in the interferometer are replaced with controlled-swap gates and measurements on ancilla qubits; these swap tests project input Fock states onto NOON states and coherent states onto entangled coherent states, leading to improved sensitivity to small phase shifts in one arm.

What carries the argument

Controlled-swap gates between the interferometer modes and ancilla qubits followed by ancilla measurement, which perform swap-test projections onto entangled states.

If this is right

  • Phase estimation can approach the Heisenberg limit without preparing complex input states at the interferometer entrance.
  • Biasing ancilla noise toward phase flips maintains the projection advantage even with imperfect operations.
  • Numerical simulations indicate that the scheme is compatible with existing circuit quantum electrodynamics hardware.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same projection technique could be applied to other linear optical sensing setups to reduce the need for pre-entangled resources.
  • Designing ancilla qubits or gates to favor phase-flip errors over other error types may become a general engineering choice for metrology protocols.

Load-bearing premise

The controlled-swap operations and ancilla measurements can be performed with sufficiently low error rates that the projection onto the desired entangled states remains useful.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures phase-estimation variance as a function of total photon number and finds scaling no better than the standard quantum limit in the swap-test interferometer under the reported ancilla-noise model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2112.02568 by Iivari Pietik\"ainen, Ond\v{r}ej \v{C}ernot\'ik, Radim Filip, Shruti Puri, S. M. Girvin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Swap-test interferometry. (a) Mach–Zehnder inter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic depiction of state overlap (top) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Quantum Fisher information in swap-test in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Classical Fisher information in swap-test interfer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Numerical simulations of swap-test interferometry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Swap-test interferometry with controlled-phase [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Swap-test interferometry with controlled beam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Mach--Zehnder interferometer is a powerful device for detecting small phase shifts between two light beams. Simple input states -- such as coherent states or single photons -- can reach the standard quantum limit of phase estimation while more complicated states can be used to reach Heisenberg scaling; the latter, however, require complex states at the input of the interferometer which are difficult to prepare. The quest for highly sensitive phase estimation therefore calls for interferometers with nonlinear devices which would make the preparation of these complex states more efficient. Here, we show that the Heisenberg scaling can be recovered with simple input states (including Fock and coherent states) when the linear mirrors in the interferometer are replaced with controlled-swap gates and measurements on ancilla qubits. These swap tests project the input Fock and coherent states onto NOON and entangled coherent states, respectively, leading to improved sensitivity to small phase shifts in one of the interferometer arms. We perform detailed analysis of ancilla errors, showing that biasing the ancilla towards phase flips offers a great advantage, and perform thorough numerical simulations of a possible implementation in circuit quantum electrodynamics. Our results thus present a viable approach to phase estimation approaching Heisenberg-limited sensitivity.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that replacing linear mirrors in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer with controlled-swap gates followed by ancilla measurements projects simple input states (Fock or coherent) onto NOON or entangled-coherent states, recovering Heisenberg-limited phase sensitivity. The authors analyze the effect of biased ancilla noise (favoring phase flips) and support the proposal with numerical simulations of a circuit-QED implementation.

Significance. If the swap-test projections retain sufficient fidelity and success probability under realistic noise, the scheme offers a route to Heisenberg scaling that avoids the need to prepare complex input states directly. The explicit treatment of biased ancilla noise and the cQED numerics constitute a concrete, platform-specific advantage that could be tested experimentally.

major comments (2)
  1. [§III] §III (ancilla-error analysis): the derivation that phase-flip-biased noise preserves the 1/N scaling assumes that the post-selected state remains exactly the ideal NOON/entangled-coherent state; the finite success probability of the controlled-swap test and residual amplitude-damping channels are not shown to scale slower than 1/N, which is required for a net Heisenberg advantage.
  2. [§IV] §IV (cQED simulations): the numerical results in Figs. 4–6 report an advantage only for the specific error model with dominant phase flips; it is not demonstrated that the same advantage survives when realistic photon-loss rates in the interferometer arms (comparable to ancilla decoherence) are included at the level used for the ancilla qubits.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract states that the scheme works for 'Fock and coherent states' but the main text should explicitly state the photon-number range over which the projection fidelity remains above the threshold needed for Heisenberg scaling.
  2. [§II] Notation for the controlled-swap operation is introduced without a diagram; adding a circuit diagram in §II would clarify the timing of the ancilla measurement relative to the phase shift.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§III] §III (ancilla-error analysis): the derivation that phase-flip-biased noise preserves the 1/N scaling assumes that the post-selected state remains exactly the ideal NOON/entangled-coherent state; the finite success probability of the controlled-swap test and residual amplitude-damping channels are not shown to scale slower than 1/N, which is required for a net Heisenberg advantage.

    Authors: The analysis in §III shows that, for the biased phase-flip channel, the post-selected state after the swap test remains exactly the ideal NOON or entangled-coherent state (up to a global phase) with probability independent of N. The success probability of the controlled-swap test is N-independent for Fock and coherent inputs, and the bias parameter exponentially suppresses any residual amplitude-damping contribution that could otherwise introduce N-dependent degradation. We will add an explicit paragraph deriving the overall scaling of the phase-estimation variance (including the constant success-probability factor) to make this net Heisenberg advantage transparent. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§IV] §IV (cQED simulations): the numerical results in Figs. 4–6 report an advantage only for the specific error model with dominant phase flips; it is not demonstrated that the same advantage survives when realistic photon-loss rates in the interferometer arms (comparable to ancilla decoherence) are included at the level used for the ancilla qubits.

    Authors: The simulations in §IV isolate the effect of biased ancilla noise while treating the interferometer arms as ideal, consistent with the paper’s focus on ancilla-error tolerance. Photon loss in the arms would affect both the conventional Mach–Zehnder interferometer and the swap-test version; however, we agree that demonstrating robustness when arm-loss rates are comparable to ancilla decoherence rates would strengthen the claim. We will therefore extend the circuit-QED numerics to include such arm losses and report the resulting sensitivity scaling. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper proposes a modified Mach-Zehnder interferometer using controlled-swap gates and ancilla measurements to project Fock or coherent inputs onto NOON or entangled-coherent states, thereby recovering Heisenberg scaling from standard phase estimation on those states. This construction follows directly from established quantum optics and quantum information primitives (swap tests, post-selection) without any fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-definitional loops, or load-bearing self-citations. The ancilla-error analysis and cQED simulations rest on independent physical noise models rather than reducing to the target scaling by construction. The central claim therefore remains externally falsifiable and does not collapse to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proposal rests on standard quantum optics assumptions about unitary swap operations and the ability to bias ancilla noise; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Controlled-swap gates and ancilla measurements can be realized with error rates low enough that the projected states retain metrological advantage.
    Invoked when claiming recovery of Heisenberg scaling in the presence of ancilla noise.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5759 in / 1161 out tokens · 23644 ms · 2026-05-24T13:09:38.180695+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Ancilla-Error-Transparent Controlled Beam Splitter Gate

    quant-ph 2021-12 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Proposal for an ancilla-error-transparent controlled beam splitter gate implemented via Kerr-cat qubits in circuit QED.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Swap-test interferometry with biased ancilla noise

    are used; the detection of the fields is replaced by measurement of the ancilla in the X basis. (c) Depiction of a possible experimental implementa- tion in circuit QED. Two three-dimensional microwave cavity modes interact with a SNAIL circuit. The SNAIL is used to implement a Kerr-cat qubit which controls the swapping of the two fields. Using a Kerr-cat q...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    The proposed swap-test interferometry uses two such swap tests sandwiching a phase shift on one of the two modes as shown in Fig

    If, on the other hand, one of the Bell states|Ψ±⟩ is at the input of the swap test, only one measurement outcome is possible—for the symmetric state|Ψ+⟩, the ancilla is always in the state |+⟩ whereas for the antisymmetric state|Ψ−⟩ it is always in the state |−⟩. The proposed swap-test interferometry uses two such swap tests sandwiching a phase shift on o...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Classical Fisher information in swap-test interfer- ometry with entangled coherent states

    The highest quantum Fisher information (and therefore highest phase sensitivity) is achieved in the two limiting cases n1 = 0, n1 = n which correspond to the whole energy being con- centrated in one of the modes (with either α1 = √n, α2 = 0, or α1 = 0, α2 =−√n); the minimum is reached 6 0 25 50 75 100Fisher information (a) FC FQ 101 102 (c) 0 /4 /2 Phase ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    When the cat ancilla is in the logical state |0L⟩ =|β⟩, the two gates cancel each other since U+ = U† − and the joint state of the fields is unchanged

    is preceded (or, equivalently, followed) by a deterministic beam splitter that applies the unitary U−. When the cat ancilla is in the logical state |0L⟩ =|β⟩, the two gates cancel each other since U+ = U† − and the joint state of the fields is unchanged. When, on the other hand, the cat starts from the logical state |1L⟩ =|− β⟩, the two gates add up and pe...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, M

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, M. Jarzyna, and J. Ko lody´ nski, Quantum limits in optical interfer- ometry, in Progress in Optics , Vol. 60 (Elsevier, 2015) pp. 345–435

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Reviews of Modern Physics 89, 035002 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nature Photonics 5, 222 (2011)

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    Polino, M

    E. Polino, M. Valeri, N. Spagnolo, and F. Sciarrino, Photonic quantum metrology, AVS Quantum Science 2, 024703 (2020)

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    J. L. O’Brien, G. J. Pryde, A. G. White, T. C. Ralph, and D. Branning, Demonstration of an all-optical quantum controlled-NOT gate, Nature 426, 264 (2003)

    work page 2003

  10. [10]

    Crespi, R

    A. Crespi, R. Osellame, R. Ramponi, D. J. Brod, E. F. Galv˜ ao, N. Spagnolo, C. Vitelli, E. Maiorino, P. Mat- aloni, and F. Sciarrino, Integrated multimode interferom- eters with arbitrary designs for photonic boson sampling, Nature Photonics 7, 545 (2013)

    work page 2013

  11. [11]

    Miˇ cuda, M

    M. Miˇ cuda, M. Sedl´ ak, I. Straka, M. Mikov´ a, M. Duˇ sek, M. Jeˇ zek, and J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, Efficient experimental esti- mation of fidelity of linear optical quantum Toffoli gate, Physical Review Letters 111, 160407 (2013)

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    Peruzzo, J

    A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O’Brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nature Communications 5, 4213 (2014)

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    Pezz´ e, A

    L. Pezz´ e, A. Smerzi, G. Khoury, J. F. Hodelin, and D. Bouwmeester, Phase detection at the quantum limit with multiphoton Mach-Zehnder interferometry, Physical Review Letters 99, 223602 (2007)

    work page 2007

  14. [14]

    Pezz´ e and A

    L. Pezz´ e and A. Smerzi, Mach-Zehnder interferometry at the Heisenberg limit with coherent and squeezed-vacuum light, Physical Review Letters 100, 073601 (2008)

    work page 2008

  15. [15]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum- enhanced measurements: Beating the standard quantum limit, Science 306, 1330 (2004)

    work page 2004

  16. [16]

    Walther, J.-W

    P. Walther, J.-W. Pan, M. Aspelmeyer, R. Ursin, S. Gas- paroni, and A. Zeilinger, De Broglie wavelength of a non- local four-photon state, Nature 429, 158 (2004)

    work page 2004

  17. [17]

    J. Joo, W. J. Munro, and T. P. Spiller, Quantum metrol- ogy with entangled coherent states, Physical Review Let- ters 107, 083601 (2011)

    work page 2011

  18. [18]

    Cable and J

    H. Cable and J. P. Dowling, Efficient generation of large number-path entanglement using only linear optics and feed-forward, Physical Review Letters 99, 163604 (2007)

    work page 2007

  19. [19]

    Zhang, M

    J. Zhang, M. Um, D. Lv, J.-N. Zhang, L.-M. Duan, and K. Kim, Noon states of nine quantized vibrations in two radial modes of a trapped ion, Physical Review Letters 121, 160502 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Hlouˇ sek, M

    J. Hlouˇ sek, M. Dudka, I. Straka, and M. Jeˇ zek, Accurate detection of arbitrary photon statistics, Physical Review Letters 123, 153604 (2019)

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    Achilles, C

    D. Achilles, C. Silberhorn, and I. A. Walmsley, Di- rect, loss-tolerant characterization of nonclassical photon statistics, Physical Review Letters 97, 043602 (2006)

    work page 2006

  22. [22]

    S. Ding, G. Maslennikov, R. Habl¨ utzel, and D. Matsuke- vich, Cross-kerr nonlinearity for phonon counting, Phys- ical Review Letters 119, 193602 (2017)

    work page 2017

  23. [23]

    F. Wolf, C. Shi, J. C. Heip, M. Gessner, L. Pezz` e, A. Smerzi, M. Schulte, K. Hammerer, and P. O. Schmidt, Motional fock states for quantum-enhanced amplitude and phase measurements with trapped ions, Nature Com- munications 10, 2929 (2019)

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Ohira, T

    R. Ohira, T. Mukaiyama, and K. Toyoda, Phonon- number-resolving detection of multiple local phonon modes in trapped ions, Physical Review A 100, 060301 (2019)

    work page 2019

  25. [25]

    C. S. Wang, J. C. Curtis, B. J. Lester, Y. Zhang, Y. Y. Gao, J. Freeze, V. S. Batista, P. H. Vaccaro, I. L. Chuang, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Efficient multiphoton sampling of molecular vibronic spectra on a superconducting bosonic processor, Physical Review X 10, 021060 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    J. C. Curtis, C. T. Hann, S. S. Elder, C. S. Wang, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Single-shot number-resolved detection of microwave photons with er- ror mitigation, Physical Review A 103, 023705 (2021)

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Yurke, S

    B. Yurke, S. L. McCall, and J. R. Klauder, Su(2) and su(1,1) interferometers, Physical Review A 33, 4033 (1986)

    work page 1986

  28. [28]

    M. Tse, H. Yu, N. Kijbunchoo, A. Fernandez-Galiana, P. Dupej, L. Barsotti, C. D. Blair, D. D. Brown, S. E. Dwyer, A. Effler, M. Evans, P. Fritschel, V. V. Frolov, A. C. Green, G. L. Mansell, F. Matichard, N. Maval- vala, D. E. McClelland, L. McCuller, T. McRae, J. Miller, A. Mullavey, E. Oelker, I. Y. Phinney, D. Sigg, B. J. J. Slagmolen, T. Vo, R. L. Ward,...

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    K. M. Backes, D. A. Palken, S. A. Kenany, B. M. Brubaker, S. B. Cahn, A. Droster, G. C. Hilton, S. Ghosh, H. Jackson, S. K. Lamoreaux, A. F. Leder, K. W. Lehnert, S. M. Lewis, M. Malnou, R. H. Maruyama, N. M. Rapidis, M. Simanovskaia, S. Singh, D. H. Speller, I. Urdinaran, L. R. Vale, E. C. van As- sendelft, K. van Bibber, and H. Wang, A quantum en- hance...

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    C. C. Gerry, A. Benmoussa, and R. A. Campos, Nonlin- ear interferometer as a resource for maximally entangled photonic states: Application to interferometry, Physical Review A 66, 013804 (2002)

    work page 2002

  31. [31]

    Leibfried, B

    D. Leibfried, B. DeMarco, V. Meyer, M. Rowe, A. Ben- Kish, J. Britton, W. M. Itano, B. Jelenkovi´ c, C. Langer, T. Rosenband, and D. J. Wineland, Trapped-ion quan- tum simulator: Experimental application to nonlin- ear interferometers, Physical Review Letters 89, 247901 (2002)

    work page 2002

  32. [32]

    Gross, T

    C. Gross, T. Zibold, E. Nicklas, J. Est` eve, and M. K. Oberthaler, Nonlinear atom interferometer surpasses classical precision limit, Nature 464, 1165 (2010)

    work page 2010

  33. [33]

    Z. Y. Ou, Enhancement of the phase-measurement sensi- tivity beyond the standard quantum limit by a nonlinear interferometer, Physical Review A 85, 023815 (2012)

    work page 2012

  34. [34]

    Hudelist, J

    F. Hudelist, J. Kong, C. Liu, J. Jing, Z. Ou, and W. Zhang, Quantum metrology with parametric amplifier-based photon correlation interferometers, Na- ture Communications 5, 3049 (2014)

    work page 2014

  35. [35]

    R. J. Sewell, M. Napolitano, N. Behbood, G. Colangelo, F. Martin Ciurana, and M. W. Mitchell, Ultrasensitive atomic spin measurements with a nonlinear interferome- ter, Physical Review X 4, 021045 (2014)

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    R. B. Patel, J. Ho, F. Ferreyrol, T. C. Ralph, and G. J. Pryde, A quantum Fredkin gate, Science Advances 2, e1501531 (2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    St´ arek, M

    R. St´ arek, M. Miˇ cuda, M. Mikov´ a, I. Straka, M. Duˇ sek, P. Marek, M. Jeˇ zek, R. Filip, and J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, Nonde- structive detector for exchange symmetry of photonic qubits, npj Quantum Information 4, 35 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Y. Y. Gao, B. J. Lester, K. Chou, L. Frunzio, M. H. Devoret, L. Jiang, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Entanglement of bosonic modes through an engineered exchange interaction, Nature 566, 509 (2019)

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    Zhang, J

    K. Zhang, J. Thompson, X. Zhang, Y. Shen, Y. Lu, S. Zhang, J. Ma, V. Vedral, M. Gu, and K. Kim, Modular quantum computation in a trapped ion system, Nature Communications 10, 4692 (2019)

    work page 2019

  40. [40]

    H. C. J. Gan, G. Maslennikov, K.-W. Tseng, C. Nguyen, and D. Matsukevich, Hybrid quantum computing with conditional beam splitter gate in trapped ion system, Physical Review Letters 124, 170502 (2020)

    work page 2020

  41. [41]

    A. K. Ekert, C. M. Alves, D. K. L. Oi, M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and L. C. Kwek, Direct estimations of lin- ear and nonlinear functionals of a quantum state, Physi- cal Review Letters 88, 217901 (2002)

    work page 2002

  42. [42]

    Filip, Overlap and entanglement-witness measure- ments, Physical Review A 65, 062320 (2002)

    R. Filip, Overlap and entanglement-witness measure- ments, Physical Review A 65, 062320 (2002)

    work page 2002

  43. [43]

    Nguyen, K.-W

    C.-H. Nguyen, K.-W. Tseng, G. Maslennikov, H. C. J. Gan, and D. Matsukevich, Experimental swap test of infinite dimensional quantum states, (2021), arXiv:2103.10219

    work page arXiv 2021

  44. [44]

    Carrasco, A

    J. Carrasco, A. Elben, C. Kokail, B. Kraus, and P. Zoller, Theoretical and experimental perspectives of quantum verification, PRX Quantum 2, 010102 (2021)

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    R. W. Heeres, B. Vlastakis, E. Holland, S. Krastanov, V. V. Albert, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Cavity state manipulation using photon-number selective phase gates, Physical Review Letters115, 137002 (2015)

    work page 2015

  46. [46]

    R. W. Heeres, P. Reinhold, N. Ofek, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Implementing a Universal Gate Set on a Logical Qubit Encoded in an Oscillator, Nature Communications 8, 94 (2017)

    work page 2017

  47. [47]

    Eickbusch, V

    A. Eickbusch, V. Sivak, A. Z. Ding, S. S. Elder, S. R. Jha, J. Venkatraman, B. Royer, S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret, Fast universal control of an oscilla- tor with weak dispersive coupling to a qubit, (2021), arXiv:2111.06414

    work page arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    K. C. McCormick, J. Keller, S. C. Burd, D. J. Wineland, A. C. Wilson, and D. Leibfried, Quantum-enhanced sens- ing of a single-ion mechanical oscillator, Nature 572, 86 (2019)

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    Podhora, L

    L. Podhora, L. Lachman, T. Pham, A. Lesundak, O. Cip, L. Slodicka, and R. Filip, Quantum non- gaussianity of multi-phonon states of a single atom, (2021), arXiv:2111.10129

    work page arXiv 2021

  50. [50]

    Puri and A

    S. Puri and A. Blais, Engineering the quantum states of light in a Kerr-nonlinear resonator by two-photon driv- ing, npj Quantum Information 3, 18 (2017)

    work page 2017

  51. [51]

    Grimm, N

    A. Grimm, N. E. Frattini, S. Puri, S. O. Mundhada, S. Touzard, M. Mirrahimi, S. M. Girvin, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Stabilization and operation of a Kerr-cat qubit, Nature 584, 205 (2020)

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    S. Puri, A. Grimm, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, A. Eickbusch, K. Noh, G. Roberts, L. Jiang, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. De- voret, and S. M. Girvin, Stabilized cat in driven nonlinear cavity: A fault-tolerant error syndrome detector, Physi- cal Review X 9, 041009 (2019)

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    S. Puri, L. St-Jean, J. A. Gross, A. Grimm, N. E. Frat- tini, P. S. Iyer, A. Krishna, S. Touzard, L. Jiang, A. Blais, S. T. Flammia, and S. M. Girvin, Bias-preserving gates with stabilized cat qubits, Science Advances 6, eaay5901 (2020)

    work page 2020

  54. [54]

    Ancilla-Error-Transparent Controlled Beam Splitter Gate

    I. Pietik¨ ainen, O.ˇCernot´ ık, S. Puri, R. Filip, and S. M. 15 Girvin, Ancilla-error-transparent controlled beam split- ter gate, (2021), arXiv:2112.04375

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  55. [55]

    J. F. Haase, A. Smirne, J. Ko lody´ nski, R. Demkowicz- Dobrza´ nski, and S. F. Huelga, Precision limits in quan- tum metrology with open quantum systems, Quantum Measurements and Quantum Metrology 5, 13 (2018)

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    N. E. Frattini, U. Vool, S. Shankar, A. Narla, K. M. Sliwa, and M. H. Devoret, 3-wave mixing Josephson dipole element, Applied Physics Letters 110, 222603 (2017)

    work page 2017

  57. [57]

    L. Sun, A. Petrenko, Z. Leghtas, B. Vlastakis, G. Kirch- mair, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, M. Hatridge, S. Shankar, J. Blumoff, L. Frunzio, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Tracking photon jumps with repeated quantum non-demolition parity measurements, Nature 511, 444 (2014)

    work page 2014

  58. [58]

    N. Ofek, A. Petrenko, R. Heeres, P. Reinhold, Z. Leghtas, B. Vlastakis, Y. Liu, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Ex- tending the lifetime of a quantum bit with error correc- tion in superconducting circuits, Nature 536, 441 (2016)

    work page 2016

  59. [59]

    Chu and S

    Y. Chu and S. Gr¨ oblacher, A perspective on hybrid quantum opto- and electromechanical systems, Applied Physics Letters 117, 150503 (2020)

    work page 2020

  60. [60]

    A. A. Clerk, K. W. Lehnert, P. Bertet, J. R. Petta, and Y. Nakamura, Hybrid quantum systems with cir- cuit quantum electrodynamics, Nature Physics 16, 257 (2020)

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    A. S. Darmawan, B. J. Brown, A. L. Grimsmo, D. K. Tuckett, and S. Puri, Practical quantum error correction with the XZZX code and Kerr-cat qubits, PRX Quantum 2, 030345 (2021)

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    H. Paik, D. I. Schuster, L. S. Bishop, G. Kirchmair, G. Catelani, A. P. Sears, B. R. Johnson, M. J. Reagor, L. Frunzio, L. I. Glazman, S. M. Girvin, M. H. De- voret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Observation of High Coher- ence in Josephson Junction Qubits Measured in a Three- Dimensional Circuit QED Architecture, Physical Review Letters 107, 240501 (2011)

    work page 2011

  63. [63]

    Reagor, W

    M. Reagor, W. Pfaff, C. Axline, R. W. Heeres, N. Ofek, K. Sliwa, E. Holland, C. Wang, J. Blumoff, K. Chou, M. J. Hatridge, L. Frunzio, M. H. Devoret, L. Jiang, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Quantum memory with millisecond coherence in circuit QED, Physical Review B 94, 014506 (2016)

    work page 2016

  64. [64]

    Chakram, A

    S. Chakram, A. E. Oriani, R. K. Naik, A. V. Dixit, K. He, A. Agrawal, H. Kwon, and D. I. Schuster, Seamless high- Q microwave cavities for multimode circuit QED, Phys- ical Review Letters 127, 107701 (2021)

    work page 2021

  65. [65]

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X.-M. Lu, and X. Wang, Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estima- tion, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53, 023001 (2019). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS O.ˇC. and I.P. have received funding from the project LTAUSA19099 of the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS ˇCR). R.F. acknowledges project 21-1326...

    work page 2019