Recognition: 1 theorem link
Helios: A 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer
Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 15:53 UTC · model grok-4.3
The pith
A 98-qubit trapped-ion processor shows that measured gate errors accurately predict performance in circuits too complex for classical simulation.
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
Helios is a 98-qubit trapped-ion processor based on the QCCD architecture that uses hyperfine qubits in barium-137 ions, a rotatable ion storage ring that connects two operation zones to enable all-to-all connectivity, parallelized gates, and a software stack for real-time compilation. Averaged across all zones, the system achieves infidelities of 2.5(1) times 10 to the minus five for single-qubit gates, 7.9(2) times 10 to the minus four for two-qubit gates, and 4.8(6) times 10 to the minus four for state preparation and measurement. These component infidelities are shown to predict system-level performance both in random Clifford circuits and in random circuit sampling, the latter of which,
What carries the argument
The predictive mapping from independently measured component infidelities to full-system circuit performance, verified on random Clifford and sampling benchmarks.
If this is right
- Random Clifford circuits execute with total error rates matching the sum of individual gate and measurement infidelities.
- Random circuit sampling produces output distributions that lie beyond the reach of classical simulation methods.
- Parallel operations and the rotatable ring introduce no detectable excess error at the 98-qubit scale.
- Further reduction in two-qubit gate infidelity would directly increase the maximum circuit depth reachable with acceptable total error.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- The same error-budgeting approach could be used to forecast performance when the system is scaled to several hundred qubits.
- Reaching two-qubit gate infidelities below 5 times 10 to the minus four would place the hardware near thresholds needed for basic quantum error correction.
- Real-time compilation of dynamic programs opens the possibility of running adaptive algorithms that adjust circuit structure based on mid-circuit measurements.
Load-bearing premise
That the infidelities measured on isolated gates and operations continue to dominate the total error in large circuits without extra contributions from the rotatable ring, parallel operations, or long-range interactions.
What would settle it
Observation of an error rate in a 40-qubit random circuit that exceeds the value predicted from the reported component infidelities by more than the stated uncertainties would falsify the predictive claim.
read the original abstract
We report on Quantinuum Helios, a 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum processor based on the quantum charge-coupled device (QCCD) architecture. Helios features $^{137}$Ba$^{+}$ hyperfine qubits, all-to-all connectivity enabled by a rotatable ion storage ring connecting two quantum operation regions by a junction, speed improvements from parallelized operations, and a new software stack with real-time compilation of dynamic programs. Averaged over all operational zones in the system, we achieve average infidelities of $2.5(1)\times10^{-5}$ for single-qubit gates, $7.9(2)\times10^{-4}$ for two-qubit gates, and $4.8(6)\times10^{-4}$ for state preparation and measurement, none of which are fundamentally limited and likely able to be improved. These component infidelities are predictive of system-level performance in both random Clifford circuits and random circuit sampling, the latter demonstrating that Helios operates well beyond the reach of classical simulation and establishes a new frontier of fidelity and complexity for quantum computers.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript reports on Quantinuum Helios, a 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum processor using the QCCD architecture with a rotatable storage ring for all-to-all connectivity, parallelized operations, and a new software stack. It provides measured average infidelities of 2.5(1)×10^{-5} for single-qubit gates, 7.9(2)×10^{-4} for two-qubit gates, and 4.8(6)×10^{-4} for SPAM across operational zones, and claims these component values are predictive of system-level performance in random Clifford circuits and random circuit sampling (RCS), establishing operation beyond classical simulation.
Significance. If the predictive claim holds, the work sets a new benchmark for trapped-ion systems by combining high fidelity at scale with architectural features that support larger circuits, advancing the field toward algorithms requiring high circuit depth and complexity.
major comments (1)
- [Abstract] The central claim that the reported component infidelities predict system-level fidelities in random Clifford circuits and RCS (abstract) rests on the assumption that rotatable-ring transport, junction crossings, and parallel operations introduce no additional errors beyond isolated calibrations. The manuscript does not provide an explicit error budget or direct comparison showing how these architecture-specific effects are bounded or measured in the large-scale circuits.
minor comments (1)
- [Abstract] The phrasing 'none of which are fundamentally limited and likely able to be improved' in the abstract is imprecise; reword for clarity on improvement pathways.
Simulated Author's Rebuttal
We thank the referee for their careful review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the presentation of the error analysis.
read point-by-point responses
-
Referee: [Abstract] The central claim that the reported component infidelities predict system-level fidelities in random Clifford circuits and RCS (abstract) rests on the assumption that rotatable-ring transport, junction crossings, and parallel operations introduce no additional errors beyond isolated calibrations. The manuscript does not provide an explicit error budget or direct comparison showing how these architecture-specific effects are bounded or measured in the large-scale circuits.
Authors: The manuscript reports direct measurements showing that system-level fidelities in random Clifford circuits and RCS agree closely with predictions from the component infidelities, indicating that transport, junction, and parallel-operation contributions remain subdominant. We agree, however, that an explicit error budget would make this bounding clearer and more transparent. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection that compiles calibration data on transport and junction errors, quantifies their contribution relative to the reported gate and SPAM infidelities, and directly compares these bounds against the observed circuit-level fidelities to confirm they lie within the stated uncertainties. revision: yes
Circularity Check
No circularity: experimental measurements with no self-referential derivations
full rationale
The paper is a hardware report presenting measured gate infidelities (2.5(1)×10^{-5} 1Q, 7.9(2)×10^{-4} 2Q, 4.8(6)×10^{-4} SPAM) and observed circuit fidelities in random Clifford and random circuit sampling experiments. The statement that component infidelities are predictive of system-level performance is an empirical claim supported by direct comparison of measured data, not a derivation that reduces by construction to fitted inputs or self-citations. No equations, ansatzes, uniqueness theorems, or parameter-fitting steps are described that would create circularity. The central results rest on experimental benchmarks rather than any self-referential chain.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
Forward citations
Cited by 21 Pith papers
-
Simulating the dynamics of an SU(2) matrix model on a trapped-ion quantum computer
First digital quantum simulation of SU(2) matrix model real-time dynamics on Quantinuum H2 using Loschmidt echo, with systematic error breakdown and modest post-selection gains.
-
Scalable linearized gate set tomography
Linearized gate set tomography scales error characterization to many qubits via sparse models, linear fitting, and shallow circuits, with simulations showing accuracy on 10-qubit systems including crosstalk.
-
Arts & crafts: Strong random unitaries and geometric locality
Two constructions yield strong unitary k-designs and pseudorandom unitaries on D-dimensional grids with provably optimal depth.
-
Tightening energy-based boson truncation bound using Monte Carlo-assisted methods
Monte Carlo-assisted tightening of the energy-based boson truncation bound substantially reduces volume dependence in (1+1)D scalar field theory and (2+1)D U(1) gauge theory.
-
Tightening energy-based boson truncation bound using Monte Carlo-assisted methods
A Monte Carlo-assisted analytic method tightens energy-based bounds on boson truncation errors, substantially reducing the volume dependence of the required cutoff in scalar and gauge theories.
-
Characterizing and Benchmarking Dynamic Quantum Circuits
Dynamarq is a new scalable benchmarking framework that defines structural features for dynamic quantum circuits and uses statistical models to predict hardware fidelity with transferable parameters.
-
Vertical ion transport in a surface Paul trap: escalator and elevator approaches
Two new electrode-based methods enable nearly twofold vertical adjustment of ion confinement height in surface ion traps.
-
Simplified circuit-level decoding using Knill error correction
Knill error correction reduces circuit-level decoding for quantum LDPC codes to the simpler code-capacity decoder while remaining fault-tolerant under locally decaying noise.
-
Spatial overhead reduction for 2D hypergraph product codes
A qubit-reduction method for hypergraph product codes preserves dimension, distance, and fault-tolerance properties, producing smaller codes such as [[441,64,6]] from [[610,64,6]] with comparable noise performance and...
-
Co-Designing Error Mitigation and Error Detection for Logical Qubits
Optimized QED intervals plus steady-state extraction enable PEC+QED to deliver 2-11x lower error than PEC alone on Iceberg codes for QAOA.
-
Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing with Trapped Ions: The Walking Cat Architecture
A trapped-ion architecture based on LDPC codes and cat-state factories achieves 110 logical qubits and one million T gates per day using 2514 physical qubits, with estimates for Heisenberg model simulation on 100 site...
-
Evaluation-driven Scaling for Scientific Discovery
SimpleTES scales test-time evaluation in LLMs to discover state-of-the-art solutions on 21 scientific problems across six domains, outperforming frontier models and optimization pipelines with examples like 2x faster ...
-
Yttrium ion as a platform for quantum information processing
Singly-ionized yttrium (89Y+) is positioned as a trapped-ion qubit with nuclear-spin storage, metastable manifolds, and isolated transitions for initialization, readout, and gates.
-
Runtime-efficient zero-noise extrapolation from mixed physical and logical data
Mixed physical-logical datasets for zero-noise extrapolation reduce estimator variance and physical runtime by orders of magnitude compared to pure logical or pure physical strategies when error correction suppresses ...
-
Heterogeneous architectures enable a 138x reduction in physical qubit requirements for fault-tolerant quantum computing under detailed accounting
Heterogeneous quantum architectures with task-specific hardware and QEC encodings deliver up to 138x lower physical-qubit overhead than monolithic baselines for fault-tolerant algorithms, including RSA-2048 factoring ...
-
A High Motional Frequency Ion Trapping Regime for Quantum Information Science
High motional frequency ion trapping reduces decoherence effects and accelerates experimental duty cycles in quantum information science.
-
Large-Scale Quantum Circuit Simulation on an Exascale System for QPU Benchmarking
Exascale classical simulation validates noise-tolerant performance of a 98-qubit QPU up to 48 qubits for LR-QAOA, with statistical analysis showing coherent regime up to 93 qubits before outputs become indistinguishab...
-
The Impact of Qubit Connectivity on Quantum Advantage in Noisy IQP Circuits
Sparse qubit connectivity raises compiled depth in noisy IQP circuits, requiring lower effective noise to remain outside the classically simulatable regime compared to fully connected layouts.
-
Operational criteria for quantum advantage in latency-constrained nonlocal games
A framework with operational criteria and a trapped-atom hardware proposal for achieving statistically significant quantum advantage in latency-constrained nonlocal games.
-
Hybrid Quantum-HPC Middleware Systems for Adaptive Resource, Workload and Task Management
The authors present Pilot-Quantum, a middleware for adaptive resource management in hybrid quantum-HPC systems, along with execution motifs and a performance modeling toolkit called Q-Dreamer.
-
Simulation of vibrational dynamics using qubits and qudits
Qudit encoding of the vibrational Hamiltonian yields the most accurate population transfer simulations for CO2 and H2O compared to binary and direct qubit encodings when entangling gate error rates are held equal.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
State-preparation and measurement It is difficult to differentiate state preparation errors from measurement errors [60], although from detailed modeling of 137Ba+ qubits we expect state preparation errors to be the largest contributor [32]. We measure SPAM errors by preparing 16 qubits in the 8 operation zones in the|0⟩or|1⟩states, and measuring each qub...
-
[2]
Importantly, spontaneous emission causes leakage outside of the com- putational subspace
Single-qubit gates Single-qubit gate errors are primarily caused by spon- taneous emission during the Raman gate, laser phase and intensity noise, and finite qubit coherence. Importantly, spontaneous emission causes leakage outside of the com- putational subspace. We quantify 1Q gate errors by Clif- ford randomized benchmarking (RB) [61], with details pro...
work page 2000
-
[3]
Two-qubit gates Errors in theR ZZ (θ) gates are caused by spontaneous emission from the Raman lasers and experimental imper- fections including laser phase and intensity noise at the ion’s position, thermal motion of the ions, voltage noise on the electrodes, and imprecise calibrations of the gate parameters. We validate the performance of the maxi- mally...
-
[4]
Transport idle memory errors Qubits idle during ion transport and cooling and incur memory errors due to spatiotemporal magnetic field inho- mogeneities, with their impact being heavily dependent on the circuit structure and its specific transport sched- ule. As a figure of merit we define the depth-nmemory error to be the average infidelity per qubit aft...
-
[5]
The resulting spontaneous emission can lead to bit-flip, leakage, or dephasing errors
Mid-circuit measurement and reset crosstalk MCMR causes crosstalk errors on un-measured or un- reset qubits that absorb stray measurement or reset light. The resulting spontaneous emission can lead to bit-flip, leakage, or dephasing errors. We measure MCMR crosstalk errors by partitioning the 98 qubits into target qubits that are measured and reset repeat...
-
[6]
Random Clifford circuits with mid-circuit measurements To test the ability of Helios to execute arbitrary 98- qubit circuits using all primitive components, we run circuits with layers consisting of random Clifford 1Q and 2Q gates and MCMRs. Ref. [68] introduced cir- cuits with random Clifford layers as a scalable system- level benchmark called binary ran...
-
[7]
RCS mirror benchmarking Random circuit sampling (RCS) is a system-level benchmark assessing how effectively a quantum com- puter can generate computationally complex quantum states [1]. Like BiRB, RCS probes the extent to which quantum circuits obtain the performance expected from component-level benchmarks. At the same time, be- cause the classical diffi...
-
[8]
For the fully dense random program, Fig
corresponds to fully (half) dense. For the fully dense random program, Fig. A2 shows a breakdown of the transport operation times per layer. Ring rotations dominate, while global shifts are the second-largest contributor. Future work will focus on reducing the total time spent on transport operations, thereby improving the depth-1 time. For example, com- ...
-
[9]
significance (a Bonferroni correc- tion). This means that if there are no correlated errors, 17 we will erroneously conclude there are correlated errors with at most 5% probability, known as the family-wise error rate of the hypothesis tests. We find that none of theaare larger than zero, in our 95% confidence hypothesis test, indicating no statis- ticall...
-
[10]
For the standard measurement, we findp(1|0) = 8.1(1)×10 −4 andp(0|1) = 1.6(5)×10 −4
SPAM Fora, b∈ {0,1}, letp(a|b) denote the probability of measuring outcomeagiven state preparationb. For the standard measurement, we findp(1|0) = 8.1(1)×10 −4 andp(0|1) = 1.6(5)×10 −4. For the ternary measurement, we find leakage probabilities ofp(L|0) = 2.7(8)×10 −3 andp(L|1) = 5.7(1)×10 −3, and SPAM errors ofp(1|0) = 7(1)×10 −4 andp(0|1) = 2.8(2)×10 −3...
-
[11]
In the absence of error, this process prepares the qubit in a random computational basis state
Single-qubit RB In 1Q Clifford RB, a sequence ofluniformly random Clifford group elements are applied to a qubit, followed by an inverse Clifford that randomly includes a bit-flip (X) gate. In the absence of error, this process prepares the qubit in a random computational basis state. In our decomposition of the 1Q Clifford group into native gates, the 24...
work page 2000
-
[12]
A final inverse Clifford then ideally prepares the qubit pair in a random computational basis state
Two-qubit RB Like 1QRB, 2QRB is performed by executing se- quences ofluniformly random Clifford group elements (now drawn from the 2-qubit Clifford group). A final inverse Clifford then ideally prepares the qubit pair in a random computational basis state. The 2QRB circuits are performed on 8 pairs of qubits initialized in the 8 op- eration zones, each wi...
-
[13]
Two-qubit cycle benchmarking 2QCB works by preparing eigenstates of a Pauli op- eratorP, applying a Pauli-twirled 2Q gateltimes, and measuring in thePbasis. We Pauli-twirl [93] the 2Q gates so that the error channelEcan be assumed to be a stochastic Pauli channel, which is defined as E(ρ) = X i piPiρPi,(A4) where the sum is over all Pauli operators modulo...
-
[14]
For each sequence length, we generate 10 circuits and run each circuit for 100 shots
Transport-1QRB We ran transport-1QRB withk∈ {1,2,4,8}and se- quence lengthsl∈ {8,64,128}, where sequence length here refers to the number of depth-1 transport opera- tions. For each sequence length, we generate 10 circuits and run each circuit for 100 shots. TABLE A5. Transport-1QRB leakage rates and average infi- delities. Transport depth is the number o...
-
[15]
MCMR crosstalk test We quantify MCMR crosstalk errors by fitting the spectator qubit survival probabilities to a linear decay model as a function of the number of applied MCMRs to the target qubits. We relate the fit parameters to error magnitude based on an effective quantum jump operator description of the error channel. This is an expansion of previous...
- [16]
- [17]
-
[18]
M. DeCross, R. Haghshenas, M. Liu, E. Rinaldi, J. Gray, Y. Alexeev, C. H. Baldwin, J. P. Bartolotta, M. Bohn, E. Chertkov,et al., Computational power of random quantum circuits in arbitrary geometries, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021052 (2025)
work page 2025
-
[19]
C. Ryan-Anderson, J. G. Bohnet, K. Lee, D. Gresh, A. Hankin, J. P. Gaebler, D. Francois, A. Chernoguzov, D. Lucchetti, N. C. Brown,et al., Realization of real- time fault-tolerant quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. X11, 041058 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[20]
R. Acharya, D. A. Abanin, L. Aghababaie-Beni, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann,et al., Quan- tum error correction below the surface code threshold, Nature638, 920–926 (2024)
work page 2024
-
[21]
D. J. Wineland, C. Monroe, W. M. Itano, D. Leibfried, B. E. King, and D. M. Meekhof, Experimental issues in coherent quantum-state manipulation of trapped atomic ions, Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology103, 259 (1998)
work page 1998
-
[22]
D. Kielpinski, C. Monroe, and D. J. Wineland, Architec- ture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer, Nature 417, 709 (2002)
work page 2002
-
[23]
J. P. Home, D. Hanneke, J. D. Jost, J. M. Amini, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, Complete methods set for scalable ion trap quantum information process- ing, Science325, 1227 (2009)
work page 2009
-
[24]
J. M. Pino, J. M. Dreiling, C. Figgatt, J. P. Gaebler, S. A. Moses, M. S. Allman, C. H. Baldwin, M. Foss- Feig, D. Hayes, K. Mayer,et al., Demonstration of the trapped-ion quantum ccd computer architecture, Nature 592, 209 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[25]
S. A. Moses, C. H. Baldwin, M. S. Allman, R. Ancona, L. Ascarrunz,et al., A race-track trapped-ion quantum processor, Phys. Rev. X13, 041052 (2023)
work page 2023
-
[26]
C. Mordini, A. Ricci Vasquez, Y. Motohashi, M. M¨ uller, M. Malinowski, C. Zhang, K. K. Mehta, D. Kienzler, and J. P. Home, Multizone trapped-ion qubit control in an integrated photonics qccd device, Phys. Rev. X15, 011040 (2025)
work page 2025
-
[27]
D. Bluvstein, H. Levine, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, M. Kalinowski, A. Keesling, N. Maskara, H. Pichler, M. Greiner,et al., A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays, Nature 604, 451 (2022)
work page 2022
- [28]
-
[29]
Y. Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. X. Wei, E. van den Berg, S. Rosenblatt, H. Nayfeh, Y. Wu, M. Zaletel, K. Temme,et al., Evidence for the utility of quan- tum computing before fault tolerance, Nature618, 500 (2023)
work page 2023
-
[30]
A. Radnaev, W. Chung, D. Cole, D. Mason, T. Bal- lance, M. Bedalov, D. Belknap, M. Berman, M. Blakely, I. Bloomfield,et al., Universal neutral-atom quantum computer with individual optical addressing and nonde- structive readout, PRX Quantum6, 030334 (2025)
work page 2025
-
[31]
J.-S. Chen, E. Nielsen, M. Ebert, V. Inlek, K. Wright, V. Chaplin, A. Maksymov, E. P´ aez, A. Poudel, P. Maunz, et al., Benchmarking a trapped-ion quantum computer with 30 qubits, Quantum8, 1516 (2024)
work page 2024
-
[32]
M. F. Brandl, A quantum von neumann architecture for large-scale quantum computing (2017), arXiv:1702.02583 [quant-ph]
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
-
[33]
M. Dietrich, N. Kurz, T. Noel, G. Shu, and B. Blinov, Hyperfine and optical barium ion qubits, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics81, 052328 (2010)
work page 2010
-
[34]
W. C. Burton, B. Estey, I. M. Hoffman, A. R. Perry, C. Volin, and G. Price, Transport of multispecies ion crystals through a junction in a radio-frequency paul trap, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 173202 (2023)
work page 2023
-
[35]
W. K. Hensinger, S. Olmschenk, D. Stick, D. Hu- cul, M. Yeo, M. Acton, L. Deslauriers, C. Monroe, and J. Rabchuk, T-junction ion trap array for two- dimensional ion shuttling, storage, and manipulation, Applied Physics Letters88, 034101 (2006)
work page 2006
-
[36]
R. B. Blakestad, C. Ospelkaus, A. P. VanDevender, J. M. Amini, J. Britton, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, High-fidelity transport of trapped-ion qubits through an X-junction trap array, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 153002 (2009)
work page 2009
-
[37]
C. Decaroli, R. Matt, R. Oswald, C. Axline, M. Ernzer, J. Flannery, S. Ragg, and J. P. Home, Design, fabrication and characterization of a micro-fabricated stacked-wafer segmented ion trap with two x-junctions, Quantum Sci- ence and Technology6, 044001 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[38]
R. B. Blakestad, C. Ospelkaus, A. P. VanDevender, J. H. Wesenberg, M. J. Biercuk, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, Near-ground-state transport of trapped-ion qubits through a multidimensional array, Phys. Rev. A 84, 032314 (2011)
work page 2011
- [39]
-
[40]
J. M. Amini, H. Uys, J. H. Wesenberg, S. Seidelin, J. Britton, J. J. Bollinger, D. Leibfried, C. Ospelkaus, A. P. VanDevender, and D. J. Wineland, Toward scal- able ion traps for quantum information processing, New Journal of Physics12, 033031 (2010)
work page 2010
-
[41]
D. L. Moehring, C. Highstrete, D. Stick, K. M. Fortier, R. Haltli, C. Tigges, and M. G. Blain, Design, fabrication and experimental demonstration of junction surface ion traps, New Journal of Physics13, 075018 (2011)
work page 2011
-
[42]
G. Shu, G. Vittorini, A. Buikema, C. S. Nichols, C. Volin, D. Stick, and K. R. Brown, Heating rates and ion-motion control in aY-junction surface-electrode trap, Phys. Rev. A89, 062308 (2014)
work page 2014
-
[43]
J. Chiaverini, R. B. Blakestad, J. Britton, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, D. Leibfried, R. Ozeri, and D. J. Wineland, Surface-electrode architecture for ion-trap 23 quantum information processing, Quantum Info. Com- put.5, 419–439 (2005)
work page 2005
-
[44]
D. Kielpinski, B. E. King, C. J. Myatt, C. A. Sack- ett, Q. A. Turchette, W. M. Itano, C. Monroe, D. J. Wineland, and W. H. Zurek, Sympathetic cooling of trapped ions for quantum logic, Phys. Rev. A61, 032310 (2000)
work page 2000
-
[45]
A. Sørensen and K. Mølmer, Entanglement and quantum computation with ions in thermal motion, Phys. Rev. A 62, 022311 (2000)
work page 2000
-
[46]
P. J. Lee, K.-A. Brickman, L. Deslauriers, P. C. Haljan, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Phase control of trapped ion quantum gates, Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics7, S371 (2005)
work page 2005
-
[47]
F. A. An, A. Ransford, A. Schaffer, L. R. Sletten, J. Gae- bler, J. Hostetter, and G. Vittorini, High fidelity state preparation and measurement of ion hyperfine qubits withI > 1 2, Physical Review Letters129, 130501 (2022)
work page 2022
-
[48]
A. Ransford, C. Roman, T. Dellaert, P. McMillin, and W. C. Campbell, Weak dissipation for high-fidelity qubit- state preparation and measurement, Physical Review A 104, L060402 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[49]
J. Gaebler, A. Ransford, L. Sletten, F. An, J. Hostetter, A. Schaffer, and G. Vittorini, Detecting leakage errors in hyperfine qubits, U.S. patent 20,240,211,792 (2024), filed November 20, 2023
work page 2024
- [50]
-
[51]
D. T. C. Allcock, W. C. Campbell, J. Chiaverini, I. L. Chuang, E. R. Hudson, I. D. Moore, A. Ransford, C. Ro- man, J. M. Sage, and D. J. Wineland, omg blueprint for trapped ion quantum computing with metastable states, Applied Physics Letters119, 214002 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[52]
S. Olmschenk, K. C. Younge, D. L. Moehring, D. N. Mat- sukevich, P. Maunz, and C. Monroe, Manipulation and detection of a trapped yb + hyperfine qubit, Phys. Rev. A76, 052314 (2007)
work page 2007
-
[53]
S. De, U. Dammalapati, K. Jungmann, and L. Willmann, Magneto-optical trapping of barium, Phys. Rev. A79, 041402 (2009)
work page 2009
-
[54]
J. Johansen, B. Estey, M. Rowe, and A. Ransford, Fast loading of a trapped ion quantum computer using a 2d magneto-optical trap, in2022 IEEE International Con- ference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) (2022) pp. 299–303
work page 2022
-
[55]
J. P. Gaebler, C. H. Baldwin, S. A. Moses, J. M. Dreil- ing, C. Figgatt, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, and J. M. Pino, Suppression of midcircuit measurement crosstalk errors with micromotion, Phys. Rev. A104, 062440 (2021)
work page 2021
- [56]
-
[57]
Openqasm live specification
-
[58]
N. C. Brown, J. P. C. III, C. Granade, B. Heim, S. Wernli, C. Ryan-Anderson, D. Lucchetti, A. Paetznick, M. Roet- teler, K. Svore,et al., Advances in compilation for quantum hardware – a demonstration of magic state distillation and repeat-until-success protocols, (2023), arXiv:2310.12106 [quant-ph]
- [59]
-
[60]
QIR Alliance, Qir specification
-
[61]
K. Svore, A. Geller, M. Troyer, J. Azariah, C. Granade, B. Heim, V. Kliuchnikov, M. Mykhailova, A. Paz, and M. Roetteler, Q#: Enabling Scalable Quantum Com- puting and Development with a High-level DSL, inPro- ceedings of the Real World Domain Specific Languages Workshop 2018, RWDSL2018 (ACM, 2018)
work page 2018
-
[62]
A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, C. J. Wood, J. Lishman, J. Gacon, S. Martiel, P. D. Nation, L. S. Bishop, A. W. Cross,et al., Quantum computing with Qiskit (2024), arXiv:2405.08810 [quant-ph]
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
-
[63]
A. W. Cross, L. S. Bishop, J. A. Smolin, and J. M. Gambetta, Open quantum assembly language (2017), arXiv:1707.03429 [quant-ph]
work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
- [64]
-
[65]
Cirq Developers,Cirq(Zenodo, 2025)
work page 2025
-
[66]
CUDA-Q Developers, Cuda-q (2025)
work page 2025
- [67]
-
[68]
Quantinuum, Gate streaming documentation (2025)
work page 2025
-
[69]
A. W. Cross, L. S. Bishop, S. Sheldon, P. D. Nation, and J. M. Gambetta, Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits, Phys. Rev. A100, 032328 (2019)
work page 2019
-
[70]
R. Blume-Kohout and K. C. Young, A volumetric frame- work for quantum computer benchmarks, Quantum4, 362 (2020)
work page 2020
- [71]
- [72]
-
[73]
T. Lubinski, S. Johri, P. Varosy, J. Coleman, L. Zhao, J. Necaise, C. H. Baldwin, K. Mayer, and T. Proctor, Application-oriented performance benchmarks for quan- tum computing, IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engi- neering4, 1 (2023)
work page 2023
-
[74]
T. Proctor, K. Young, A. D. Baczewski, and R. Blume- Kohout, Benchmarking quantum computers (2024), arXiv:2407.08828 [quant-ph]
-
[75]
J. E. Christensen, D. Hucul, W. C. Campbell, and E. R. Hudson, High-fidelity manipulation of a qubit enabled by a manufactured nucleus, npj Quantum Information6 (2020)
work page 2020
-
[76]
E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, Charac- terizing quantum gates via randomized benchmarking, Physical Review A85(2012)
work page 2012
-
[77]
Y.-H. Chen and C. H. Baldwin, Randomized benchmark- ing with leakage errors (2025), arXiv:2502.00154 [quant- ph]
-
[78]
B. Efron and R. Tibshirani, An Introduction to the Boot- strap (1993). 24
work page 1993
-
[79]
I. D. Moore, W. C. Campbell, E. R. Hudson, M. J. Bo- guslawski, D. J. Wineland, and D. T. C. Allcock, Photon scattering errors during stimulated raman transitions in trapped-ion qubits, Phys. Rev. A107, 032413 (2023)
work page 2023
- [80]
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.