pith. sign in

arxiv: 2508.10850 · v3 · submitted 2025-08-14 · 🪐 quant-ph

Scalable platform for qudit-based quantum computing using polar molecules

Soleh Kh. Muminov , Evgeniy O. Kiktenko , Anastasiia S. Nikolaeva , Denis A. Drozhzhin , Sergey I. Matveenko , Aleksey K. Fedorov , Georgy V. Shlyapnikov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 22:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords polar moleculesquditsquantum computingoptical tweezersdipole-dipole interactionsrotational statesquantum gatesscalable architectures
0
0 comments X

The pith

Polar molecules in optical tweezers enable scalable qudit quantum processors via dipole-dipole gates.

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

The paper proposes a platform that encodes quantum information in the rotational states of polar molecules held in arrays of optical tweezers. Scalability is obtained by increasing the number of molecules rather than the dimension of each qudit, producing exponential growth in the available state space. Entangling gates are performed by adiabatically moving traps closer together so that dipole-dipole interactions become active and controllable. Encoding schemes map individual qubits or pairs of qubits onto qudits with dimension between 2 and 5, supplying a universal gate set while extra levels in dimensions 3 and 5 reduce the complexity of some multiqubit operations. Parameter estimates are given for SrF and NaCs to show the scheme is compatible with current laboratory capabilities.

Core claim

Arrays of polar molecules confined in optical tweezers can serve as a scalable qudit processor in which rotational states encode the qudits, and entangling operations between any pair are realized by adiabatically varying trap separation to activate dipole-dipole coupling; qubit-to-qudit mappings for d from 2 to 5 supply a complete gate set and simplify certain multiqubit decompositions.

What carries the argument

Adiabatic variation of optical-trap separation that turns dipole-dipole interactions on and off between polar molecules to implement entangling gates on their rotational-state qudits.

If this is right

  • A universal set of single-qudit and two-qudit gates is available for every dimension from 2 to 5.
  • Extra levels in d=3 and d=5 qudits reduce the number of elementary gates needed for multiqubit operations.
  • Exponential growth of the total Hilbert space occurs simply by adding more molecules to the array.
  • Realistic laser and trap parameters for SrF and NaCs molecules support the required interaction strengths and coherence times.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same trap-merging technique could be combined with existing molecular cooling methods to reach higher gate speeds.
  • Encoding choices developed here may transfer directly to other multilevel physical systems such as trapped ions or superconducting circuits.
  • Small-scale demonstrations with three to five molecules would provide a direct test of whether the adiabatic gate protocol maintains fidelity as array size grows.

Load-bearing premise

Adiabatically bringing the optical traps together activates controllable dipole-dipole interactions that produce high-fidelity entangling gates without significant decoherence or loss of molecules.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures the fidelity of a two-molecule entangling gate performed by adiabatically merging and separating optical traps and shows error rates low enough for fault-tolerant quantum computation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.10850 by Aleksey K. Fedorov, Anastasiia S. Nikolaeva, Denis A. Drozhzhin, Evgeniy O. Kiktenko, Georgy V. Shlyapnikov, Sergey I. Matveenko, Soleh Kh. Muminov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Encoding schemes for qubits within the internal state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Schematic illustration of implementing a qubit-based quantum circuit using dipolar qudits, where each qudit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. A summary of the schemes for encoding a single or two qubits in a single dipole with FIG. 3. A summary of the schemes for encoding a single or two qubits in a single dipole with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) FIG. 4. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) The scheme of the controlled iSWAP gate. (b) FIG. 5. (a) The scheme of the controlled iSWAP gate. (b FIG. 5. (a) The scheme of the controlled iSWAP gate. (b) Ththif thCNOT tbtbitfdi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: IV. CONCLUSION We have developed a scalable qudit platform based on diatomic polar molecules, which is among the lead￾ing platforms for quantum technologies. Our approach uses rotational levels of the molecules with qudit dimen￾sions d = 2, 3, 4 and 5. A universal gate set has been proposed, and entangling gates between qudits are cre￾ated relying on molecules moving in optical traps and exhibiting coheren… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We propose a scalable qudit-based quantum processor using rotational states of polar molecules. Previously, molecular internal states were used to enlarge Hilbert space, whereas our approach uses optical tweezer arrays to achieve scalable architectures with exponential state-space growth without increasing qudit dimensionality $d$. Entangling gates are implemented by adiabatically bringing traps together to activate dipole-dipole interactions. We develop encoding schemes mapping single qubits into qudits with $2\leq d\leq5$ and pairs of qubits into $d=4,5$ qudits, enabling universal set of quantum gates. Additional levels in $d=3$ and $d=5$ qudits simplify multiqubit gate decompositions. We analyze experimental parameters for SrF and NaCs molecules. This approach provides a promising route to scalable quantum information processing with multilevel systems using existing experimental platforms.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a proposal for a scalable qudit-based quantum processor utilizing the rotational states of polar molecules confined in optical tweezer arrays. It outlines encoding schemes that map individual qubits to qudits with dimensions ranging from 2 to 5 and pairs of qubits to qudits of dimension 4 or 5, facilitating a universal set of quantum gates. Entangling gates are achieved by adiabatically merging optical traps to engage dipole-dipole interactions. The authors analyze relevant experimental parameters for SrF and NaCs molecules and argue that this method offers a promising approach to scalable quantum information processing with multilevel systems using current experimental setups.

Significance. Should the central assumptions regarding adiabatic control and interaction strengths hold, this work could represent a meaningful contribution to the field of molecular quantum computing. By leveraging spatial scalability in tweezer arrays rather than increasing qudit dimension, it addresses a key challenge in scaling qudit systems. The encoding schemes that reduce the complexity of multiqubit gate decompositions are particularly noteworthy. The analysis of specific molecules like SrF and NaCs grounds the proposal in realistic experimental contexts, potentially inspiring further theoretical and experimental investigations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Gate implementation] The description of entangling gates via adiabatic trap merging does not include explicit calculations of the adiabatic timescale compared to the trap frequency or estimates of motional excitation and decoherence during the process for SrF and NaCs. This is load-bearing for the claim of high-fidelity gates without significant loss of control, as the center-of-mass motion couples to the internal-state-dependent interactions.
  2. [Encoding and analysis sections] The manuscript provides no detailed fidelity calculations or error analysis for the proposed gates, leaving the practical viability of the universal gate set and the encoding schemes unverified.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Clarify how the approach achieves exponential state-space growth without increasing d, as this appears to refer to the number of qudits rather than dimensionality per qudit.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional details and clarifications where possible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Gate implementation] The description of entangling gates via adiabatic trap merging does not include explicit calculations of the adiabatic timescale compared to the trap frequency or estimates of motional excitation and decoherence during the process for SrF and NaCs. This is load-bearing for the claim of high-fidelity gates without significant loss of control, as the center-of-mass motion couples to the internal-state-dependent interactions.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee pointing out the need for more quantitative support on this point. The original manuscript provided order-of-magnitude estimates for interaction strengths and gate durations based on published dipole moments and typical tweezer parameters for SrF and NaCs. In the revision we have added explicit estimates of the adiabatic timescale derived from the Landau-Zener condition, comparing the ramp rate to the minimum energy gap during trap merging, and we compare this timescale to reported trap frequencies (∼1–10 kHz). We also include rough estimates of motional excitation probability assuming harmonic confinement and discuss leading decoherence channels (e.g., blackbody radiation and residual electric-field noise). A full numerical treatment of the coupled motional–internal dynamics during the merging process lies outside the scope of the present proposal and would require dedicated simulations; we have noted this limitation and flagged it as future work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Encoding and analysis sections] The manuscript provides no detailed fidelity calculations or error analysis for the proposed gates, leaving the practical viability of the universal gate set and the encoding schemes unverified.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative fidelity estimates would strengthen the presentation. Because the work is a conceptual proposal focused on architecture and encoding, we limited the analysis to analytical gate decompositions and coherence-time comparisons with existing experiments. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated paragraph outlining dominant error sources (imperfect adiabaticity, finite coherence times, and laser intensity noise) and have inserted order-of-magnitude infidelity estimates drawn from published molecular tweezer results. We maintain that the proposed encodings reduce the number of elementary gates required for multiqubit operations, which should improve overall fidelity, but we acknowledge that end-to-end numerical simulations of the full gate set remain an important next step not performed here. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: proposal applies established dipole-dipole and tweezer physics to qudit encoding

full rationale

The manuscript presents a platform proposal that maps qubit encodings into molecular rotational qudits and implements entangling gates via adiabatic trap merging to activate known dipole-dipole couplings. All load-bearing steps invoke standard physical mechanisms (optical tweezers, dipole-dipole interactions, rotational level structure) whose validity is independent of the present work and can be checked against external literature or experiment. No equations reduce a claimed prediction to a fitted input by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior papers, and no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. The analysis of SrF and NaCs parameters is an application rather than a self-referential derivation, leaving the central claims self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proposal rests on standard assumptions from molecular physics and quantum optics; no new free parameters are fitted and no invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Adiabatic movement of traps activates dipole-dipole interactions suitable for entangling gates without prohibitive decoherence
    Invoked to implement entangling operations between qudits

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5715 in / 1187 out tokens · 34052 ms · 2026-05-18T22:41:35.668465+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Muthukrishnan and C

    A. Muthukrishnan and C. R. Stroud Jr, Physical review A 62, 052309 (2000)

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    S. D. Bartlett, H. de Guise, and B. C. Sanders, Phys. Rev. A 65, 052316 (2002)

    work page 2002

  3. [3]

    Zilic and K

    Z. Zilic and K. Radecka, IEEE Transactions on comput- ers 56, 202 (2007)

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    Parasa and M

    V. Parasa and M. Perkowski, in2011 41st IEEE Inter- national Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic(2011), pp. 224–229

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    E. T. Campbell, H. Anwar, and D. E. Browne, Physical Review X 2, 041021 (2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Duclos-Cianci and D

    G. Duclos-Cianci and D. Poulin, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics87, 062338 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    E. T. Campbell, Physical review letters 113, 230501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Anwar, B

    H. Anwar, B. J. Brown, E. T. Campbell, and D. E. Browne, New Journal of Physics16, 063038 (2014)

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    R. S. Andrist, J. R. Wootton, and H. G. Katzgraber, Physical Review A91, 042331 (2015)

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    F. H. Watson, E. T. Campbell, H. Anwar, and D. E. Browne, Physical Review A92, 022312 (2015)

    work page 2015

  11. [11]

    Krishna and J.-P

    A. Krishna and J.-P. Tillich, Physical review letters123, 070507 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. S. Nikolaeva, and A. K. Fedorov, Reviews of Modern Physics97, 021003 (2025)

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    A. D. Greentree, S. G. Schirmer, F. Green, L. C. L. Hol- lenberg, A. R. Hamilton, and R. G. Clark, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 097901 (2004), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.097901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.92.097901 2004

  14. [14]

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. K. Fedorov, O. V. Man’ko, and V. I. Man’ko, Phys. Rev. A91, 042312 (2015), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.91.042312

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.91.042312 2015

  15. [15]

    Kiktenko, A

    E. Kiktenko, A. Fedorov, A. Strakhov, and V. Man’ko, Physics Letters A 379, 1409 (2015), ISSN 0375- 9601, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0375960115002753

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    T. C. Ralph, K. J. Resch, and A. Gilchrist, Phys. Rev. A 75, 022313 (2007), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022313

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.75.022313 2007

  17. [17]

    Fedorov, L

    A. Fedorov, L. Steffen, M. Baur, M. P. da Silva, and A. Wallraff, Nature481, 170 (2012), URLhttps://doi. org/10.1038/nature10713

    work page doi:10.1038/nature10713 2012

  18. [18]

    L. B. Nguyen, N. Goss, K. Siva, Y. Kim, E. Younis, B. Qing, A. Hashim, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, Na- ture Communications 15, 7117 (2024)

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. S. Nikolaeva, P. Xu, G. V. Shlyap- nikov, and A. K. Fedorov, Physical Review A 101, 022304 (2020)

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, I. V. Zalivako, A. S. Borisenko, N. V. Semenin, K. P. Galstyan, A. E. Korolkov, E. O. Kik- tenko, K. Y. Khabarova, I. A. Semerikov, A. K. Fe- dorov, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 060601 (2025), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/p1z9-6w93

    work page doi:10.1103/p1z9-6w93 2025

  21. [21]

    Noisy intermediate- scale quantum algorithms,

    K. Bharti, A. Cervera-Lierta, T. H. Kyaw, T. Haug, S. Alperin-Lea, A. Anand, M. Degroote, H. Heimonen, J. S. Kottmann, T. Menke, et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 015004 (2022), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/RevModPhys.94.015004

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.94.015004 2022

  22. [22]

    Morvan, V

    A. Morvan, V. V. Ramasesh, M. S. Blok, J. M. Kreike- baum, K. O’Brien, L. Chen, B. K. Mitchell, R. K. Naik, D.I.Santiago, andI.Siddiqi, Physicalreviewletters 126, 210504 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    N. Goss, A. Morvan, B. Marinelli, B. K. Mitchell, L. B. Nguyen, R. K. Naik, L. Chen, C. Jünger, J. M. Kreike- baum, D. I. Santiago, et al., Nature communications13, 7481 (2022)

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Y. Sung, A. Vepsäläinen, J. Braumüller, F. Yan, J. I.-J. Wang, M. Kjaergaard, R. Winik, P. Krantz, A. Bengts- son, A. J. Melville, et al., Nature communications 12, 8 967 (2021)

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Ringbauer, M

    M. Ringbauer, M. Meth, L. Postler, R. Stricker, R. Blatt, P. Schindler, and T. Monz, Nature Physics 18, 1053 (2022)

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    I. V. Zalivako and et al., Quantum Reports 7 (2025), ISSN 2624-960X, URL https://www.mdpi.com/ 2624-960X/7/2/19

    work page 2025

  27. [27]

    Y. Fu, W. Liu, X. Ye, Y. Wang, C. Zhang, C.-K. Duan, X.Rong, andJ.Du, PhysicalReviewLetters 129, 100501 (2022)

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    H. Zhou, H. Gao, N. T. Leitao, O. Makarova, I. Cong, A. M. Douglas, L. S. Martin, and M. D. Lukin, Physical Review X 14, 031017 (2024)

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    Fernández de Fuentes, T

    I. Fernández de Fuentes, T. Botzem, M. A. Johnson, A. Vaartjes, S. Asaad, V. Mourik, F. E. Hudson, K. M. Itoh, B. C. Johnson, A. M. Jakob, et al., Nature commu- nications 15, 1380 (2024)

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    González-Cuadra, T

    D. González-Cuadra, T. V. Zache, J. Carrasco, B. Kraus, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 160501 (2022), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.129.160501

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    Sawant, J

    R. Sawant, J. A. Blackmore, P. D. Gregory, J. Mur-Petit, D. Jaksch, J. Aldegunde, J. M. Hutson, M. R. Tarbutt, and S. L. Cornish, New Journal of Physics22, 013027 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    K.-K. Ni, S. Ospelkaus, M. De Miranda, A. Pe’Er, B. Neyenhuis, J. Zirbel, S. Kotochigova, P. Julienne, D. Jin, and J. Ye, science322, 231 (2008)

    work page 2008

  33. [33]

    Deiglmayr, A

    J. Deiglmayr, A. Grochola, M. Repp, K. Mörtlbauer, C. Glück, J. Lange, O. Dulieu, R. Wester, and M. Wei- demüller, Physical review letters101, 133004 (2008)

    work page 2008

  34. [34]

    Ospelkaus, K.-K

    S. Ospelkaus, K.-K. Ni, D. Wang, M. De Miranda, B. Neyenhuis, G. Quéméner, P. Julienne, J. Bohn, D. Jin, and J. Ye, Science327, 853 (2010)

    work page 2010

  35. [35]

    K.-K. Ni, S. Ospelkaus, D. Wang, G. Quéméner, B.Neyenhuis, M.DeMiranda, J.Bohn, J.Ye, andD.Jin, Nature 464, 1324 (2010)

    work page 2010

  36. [36]

    De Miranda, A

    M. De Miranda, A. Chotia, B. Neyenhuis, D. Wang, G. Quéméner, S. Ospelkaus, J. Bohn, J. Ye, and D. Jin, Nature Physics 7, 502 (2011)

    work page 2011

  37. [37]

    L. D. Carr, D. DeMille, R. V. Krems, and J. Ye, New Journal of Physics11, 055049 (2009)

    work page 2009

  38. [38]

    DeMille, Physical Review Letters88, 067901 (2002)

    D. DeMille, Physical Review Letters88, 067901 (2002)

    work page 2002

  39. [39]

    P.D.Gregory, J.A.Blackmore, S.L.Bromley, J.M.Hut- son, and S. L. Cornish, Nature Physics17, 1149 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    L. R. Picard, A. J. Park, G. E. Patenotte, S. Gebretsad- kan, D. Wellnitz, A. M. Rey, and K.-K. Ni, Nature637, 821 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    K.-K. Ni, T. Rosenband, and D. D. Grimes, Chemical science 9, 6830 (2018)

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, L. Anderegg, E. Chae, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, Science382, 1138 (2023)

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Mitra, K

    D. Mitra, K. Leung, and T. Zelevinsky, Physical Review A 105, 040101 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    E. R. Hudson, H. Lewandowski, B. C. Sawyer, and J. Ye, Physical review letters96, 143004 (2006)

    work page 2006

  45. [45]

    Zelevinsky, S

    T. Zelevinsky, S. Kotochigova, and J. Ye, Physical review letters 100, 043201 (2008)

    work page 2008

  46. [46]

    DeMille, S

    D. DeMille, S. Sainis, J. Sage, T. Bergeman, S. Ko- tochigova, and E. Tiesinga, Physical review letters100, 043202 (2008)

    work page 2008

  47. [47]

    Sauer, H

    B. Sauer, H. Ashworth, J. Hudson, M. Tarbutt, and E. Hinds, in AIP conference proceedings(American In- stitute of Physics, 2006), vol. 869, pp. 44–51

    work page 2006

  48. [48]

    A. C. Vutha, O. K. Baker, W. C. Campbell, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, G. Gabrielse, Y. V. Gurevich, and M. A. Jansen, inAPS Division of Atomic, Molecular and Opti- cal Physics Meeting Abstracts(2008), vol. 39, pp. OPC– 50

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    Hughes, M

    M. Hughes, M. D. Frye, R. Sawant, G. Bhole, J. A. Jones, S. L. Cornish, M. Tarbutt, J. M. Hutson, D. Jaksch, and J. Mur-Petit, Physical Review A101, 062308 (2020)

    work page 2020

  50. [50]

    Herrera, Y

    F. Herrera, Y. Cao, S. Kais, and K. B. Whaley, New Journal of Physics16, 075001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  51. [51]

    E. S. Shuman, J. F. Barry, and D. DeMille, Nature467, 820 (2010)

    work page 2010

  52. [52]

    Anderegg, L

    L. Anderegg, L. W. Cheuk, Y. Bao, S. Burchesky, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, Science 365, 1156 (2019)

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    D. K. Ruttley, A. Guttridge, S. Spence, R. C. Bird, C. R. Le Sueur, J. M. Hutson, and S. L. Cornish, Physical Re- view Letters 130, 223401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    F. Luis, P. J. Alonso, O. Roubeau, V. Velasco, D. Zueco, D. Aguilà, J. I. Martínez, L. A. Barrios, and G. Aromí, Communications Chemistry 3, 176 (2020)

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    Hernández-Antón, F

    A. Hernández-Antón, F. Luis, and A. Castro, Opti- mal control of spin qudits subject to decoherence us- ing amplitude-and-frequency-constrained pulses (2024), 2403.15785, URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.15785

    work page arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Quantum mechanics: non-relativistic theory, vol. 3 (Elsevier, 2013)

    work page 2013

  57. [57]

    W.Ernst, J.Kändler, S.Kindt, andT.Törring, Chemical physics letters 113, 351 (1985)

    work page 1985

  58. [58]

    Y. Hao, L. F. Pašteka, L. Visscher, P. Aggarwal, H. L. Bethlem, A. Boeschoten, A. Borschevsky, M. Denis, K. Esajas, S. Hoekstra, et al., The Journal of chemical physics 151 (2019)

    work page 2019

  59. [59]

    P. K. Molony, P. D. Gregory, Z. Ji, B. Lu, M. P. Köp- pinger, C. R. Le Sueur, C. L. Blackley, J. M. Hutson, and S. L. Cornish, Physical review letters113, 255301 (2014)

    work page 2014

  60. [60]

    Burchesky, L

    S. Burchesky, L. Anderegg, Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, E. Chae, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, Physical Review Letters 127, 123202 (2021)

    work page 2021

  61. [61]

    Bause, M

    R. Bause, M. Li, A. Schindewolf, X.-Y. Chen, M. Duda, S. Kotochigova, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Physical Review Letters 125, 023201 (2020)

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    J. A. Blackmore, R. Sawant, P. D. Gregory, S. L. Brom- ley, J. Aldegunde, J. M. Hutson, and S. L. Cornish, Phys- ical Review A102, 053316 (2020)

    work page 2020

  63. [63]

    Seeßelberg, X.-Y

    F. Seeßelberg, X.-Y. Luo, M. Li, R. Bause, S. Ko- tochigova, I. Bloch, and C. Gohle, Physical Review Let- ters 121, 253401 (2018)

    work page 2018

  64. [64]

    J. Lin, J. He, X. Ye, and D. Wang, Physical Review A 103, 023332 (2021)

    work page 2021

  65. [65]

    Neyenhuis, B

    B. Neyenhuis, B. Yan, S. Moses, J. Covey, A. Chotia, A. Petrov, S. Kotochigova, J. Ye, and D. Jin, Physical review letters 109, 230403 (2012)

    work page 2012

  66. [66]

    C. P. Williams and C. P. Williams, Explorations in quan- tum computing pp. 51–122 (2011)

    work page 2011

  67. [67]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Physical review A105, 032621 (2022)

    work page 2022

  68. [68]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, EPJ Quantum Technology11, 1 (2024)

    work page 2024