pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.20437 · v2 · submitted 2025-11-25 · 🪐 quant-ph

Fast Quantum Gates for Neutral Atoms Separated by a Few Tens of Micrometers

Matteo Bergonzoni , Rosario Roberto Riso , Guido Pupillo This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 05:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Rydberg atomsneutral atomsquantum gatesiSWAP gatedipole-dipole interactionoptimal controlentanglementquantum processors
0
0 comments X

The pith

Neutral atoms separated by more than 20 micrometers can perform fast high-fidelity iSWAP gates via resonant Rydberg dipole-dipole interactions.

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

The paper develops a theoretical protocol for two-qubit iSWAP gates on neutral atoms more than 20 micrometers apart. It uses a single smooth laser pulse to drive coherent excitation-exchange-deexcitation dynamics between qubit states and Rydberg states under strong dipole-dipole coupling. Optimal control shapes the pulse to reach gate fidelities and durations comparable to those of blockade methods despite relevant noise sources. A sympathetic reader would care because the scheme extends the effective interaction range by an order of magnitude, which could support quantum processors with higher connectivity than current close-range designs allow.

Core claim

We present a theoretical scheme for a family of fast and high-fidelity two-qubit iSWAP gates between neutral atoms separated by more than 20 um, enabled by resonant dipole-dipole spin-exchange interactions between Rydberg states. The protocol harnesses coherent excitation-exchange-deexcitation dynamics between the qubit and the Rydberg states within a single and smooth laser pulse, in the presence of strong dipole-dipole interactions. We utilize optimal control methods to achieve theoretical gate fidelities and durations comparable to blockade-based gates in the presence of relevant noise, while extending the effective interaction range by an order of magnitude. This enables entanglementwell

What carries the argument

Resonant dipole-dipole spin-exchange between Rydberg states that drives coherent excitation exchange over long distances inside one optimized laser pulse.

Load-bearing premise

The protocol assumes that the optimal-control pulse can be realized with sufficient precision and that the dipole-dipole interaction remains dominant over other decoherence channels at the stated separations without additional experimental constraints on laser bandwidth or atomic positioning.

What would settle it

An experiment applying the shaped pulse to Rydberg atoms held 20 micrometers apart and directly measuring whether the resulting iSWAP fidelity reaches or exceeds the blockade-gate benchmark under realistic noise would settle the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.20437 by Guido Pupillo, Matteo Bergonzoni, Rosario Roberto Riso.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. iSWAP gate with Rydberg atoms [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Time-optimal and vdW-robust pulses. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Infidelity of the vdW-robust pulses for a fixed Rabi frequency Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a theoretical scheme for a family of fast and high-fidelity two-qubit iSWAP gates between neutral atoms separated by more than 20 um, enabled by resonant dipole-dipole spin-exchange interactions between Rydberg states. The protocol harnesses coherent excitation-exchange-deexcitation dynamics between the qubit and the Rydberg states within a single and smooth laser pulse, in the presence of strong dipole-dipole interactions. We utilize optimal control methods to achieve theoretical gate fidelities and durations comparable to blockade-based gates in the presence of relevant noise, while extending the effective interaction range by an order of magnitude. This enables entanglement well beyond the blockade radius, offering a route toward fast, high-connectivity quantum processors.

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 manuscript proposes a theoretical scheme for fast, high-fidelity two-qubit iSWAP gates between neutral atoms separated by more than 20 μm. The approach relies on resonant dipole-dipole spin-exchange interactions between Rydberg states, implemented via coherent excitation-exchange-deexcitation dynamics driven by a single smooth laser pulse. Optimal control is used to shape the pulse and achieve gate fidelities and durations comparable to conventional Rydberg-blockade gates while extending the effective interaction range by an order of magnitude, even in the presence of relevant noise.

Significance. If the numerical results hold, the work would meaningfully extend the range of high-fidelity entanglement operations in neutral-atom arrays, potentially enabling higher-connectivity quantum processors. The combination of resonant dipole-dipole coupling with optimal control for a smooth pulse is a constructive idea that could complement blockade-based methods. However, the significance is limited by the absence of explicit derivations, error budgets, or quantitative noise benchmarking in the presented material.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that optimal-control pulses yield iSWAP fidelities 'comparable to blockade-based gates' while extending the range by an order of magnitude rests on unshown numerics and error budgets; no explicit fidelity calculations, pulse parameters, or comparison tables are provided to support this assertion.
  2. [Protocol description] Protocol and noise analysis: the assertion that resonant dipole-dipole coupling (∝1/r³) remains dominant over decoherence at 20–30 μm separations is not quantitatively benchmarked against realistic noise spectra (spontaneous emission, laser phase noise, residual van der Waals shifts); at these distances the interaction drops to a few kHz for typical n~60 states, and the manuscript does not demonstrate that the optimal-control bandwidth satisfies ħΩ(t) ≫ V_dd while suppressing off-resonant errors.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract would benefit from specifying the Rydberg principal quantum number n and the exact separation range used for the numerical estimates.
  2. Consider adding a figure or table that shows the optimized pulse shape, population dynamics, and fidelity versus separation to make the optimal-control results more transparent.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to enhance the explicit presentation of numerical results, derivations, and noise benchmarking.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that optimal-control pulses yield iSWAP fidelities 'comparable to blockade-based gates' while extending the range by an order of magnitude rests on unshown numerics and error budgets; no explicit fidelity calculations, pulse parameters, or comparison tables are provided to support this assertion.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The numerical results of the optimal-control optimizations, including achieved gate fidelities, durations, and comparisons to blockade-based gates under noise, are contained in the main text and accompanying figures. To make the supporting evidence fully explicit and address the concern, we have added a dedicated comparison table with fidelity values, optimized pulse parameters, and an error budget summary, and we have expanded the abstract to reference these quantitative results. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Protocol description] Protocol and noise analysis: the assertion that resonant dipole-dipole coupling (∝1/r³) remains dominant over decoherence at 20–30 μm separations is not quantitatively benchmarked against realistic noise spectra (spontaneous emission, laser phase noise, residual van der Waals shifts); at these distances the interaction drops to a few kHz for typical n~60 states, and the manuscript does not demonstrate that the optimal-control bandwidth satisfies ħΩ(t) ≫ V_dd while suppressing off-resonant errors.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting the need for quantitative benchmarking. The protocol relies on optimal control to shape pulses such that the coherent dipole-dipole dynamics dominate within the gate time, and simulations incorporating spontaneous emission, phase noise, and van der Waals shifts for n≈60 states are already present. We agree that more explicit benchmarking strengthens the manuscript; the revision therefore includes additional figures and text quantifying fidelity versus each noise source, confirming that the control bandwidth satisfies ħΩ(t) ≫ V_dd and keeps off-resonant errors below the target threshold at 20–30 μm. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is a constructive protocol using optimal control on dipole-dipole dynamics

full rationale

The paper proposes a new theoretical scheme for iSWAP gates via resonant dipole-dipole spin-exchange in Rydberg states, implemented through a single smooth laser pulse whose shape is determined by optimal control to maximize fidelity under noise. This is a forward design process: the interaction Hamiltonian is taken from standard atomic physics, the pulse is numerically optimized against that Hamiltonian plus decoherence terms, and the resulting fidelities are compared to blockade gates. No equation or claim reduces to a self-definition, a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, or a load-bearing self-citation chain. The central result (gate duration and fidelity at >20 μm) is an output of the optimization, not an input, and remains falsifiable against independent experimental benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard quantum optics and Rydberg physics assumptions plus the effectiveness of optimal control; no new entities are postulated.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Resonant dipole-dipole interactions dominate at separations >20 um under the chosen Rydberg states
    Invoked to enable the spin-exchange dynamics outside the blockade radius.
  • domain assumption Optimal control can produce a single smooth pulse that achieves high fidelity in the presence of relevant noise
    Central to the protocol's performance claims.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5418 in / 1253 out tokens · 23187 ms · 2026-05-17T05:08:47.598704+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Entangling gate performance and fidelity limits with neutral atom F\"orster resonances

    quant-ph 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    A two-eigenstate model near Förster resonances bounds neutral-atom gate fidelity by F ≤ 1 - (π/2)/(V τ_R) and supplies a saturating protocol that improves the prior limit by ~40%.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Saffman, T

    M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 2313 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    Schlosser, S

    M. Schlosser, S. Tichelmann, D. Sch¨ affner, D. O. de Mello, M. Hambach, J. Sch¨ utz, and G. Birkl, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 180601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, M. Kalinowski, S. Ebadi, T. Manovitz, H. Zhou, S. H. Li, A. A. Geim, T. T. Wang, N. Maskara, H. Levine, G. Semeghini, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Nature622, 268–272 (2023)

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    S. Ma, G. Liu, P. Peng, B. Zhang, S. Jandura, J. Claes, A. P. Burgers, G. Pupillo, S. Puri, and J. D. Thompson, Nature622, 279–284 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Li, J.-L

    W.-X. Li, J.-L. Wu, S.-L. Su, and J. Qian, Phys. Rev. A 109, 012608 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    R. B.-S. Tsai, X. Sun, A. L. Shaw, R. Finkelstein, and M. Endres, PRX Quantum6, 010331 (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Peper, Y

    M. Peper, Y. Li, D. Y. Knapp, M. Bileska, S. Ma, G. Liu, P. Peng, B. Zhang, S. P. Horvath, A. P. Burgers, and J. D. Thompson, Phys. Rev. X15, 011009 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    J. A. Muniz, M. Stone, D. T. Stack, M. Jaffe, J. M. Kindem, L. Wadleigh, E. Zalys-Geller, X. Zhang, C.-A. Chen, M. A. Norcia, J. Epstein, E. Halperin, F. Hum- mel, T. Wilkason, M. Li, K. Barnes, P. Battaglino, T. C. Bohdanowicz, G. Booth, A. Brown, M. O. Brown, W. B. Cairncross, K. Cassella, R. Coxe, D. Crow, M. Feldkamp, C. Griger, A. Heinz, A. M. W. Jon...

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Morgado and S

    M. Morgado and S. Whitlock, AVS Quantum Science3, 023501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    Saffman, Quantum computing with atomic qubit ar- rays: confronting the cost of connectivity, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.11218 (2025)

    M. Saffman, Quantum computing with atomic qubit arrays: confronting the cost of connectivity (2025), arXiv:2505.11218 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Pichard, D

    G. Pichard, D. Lim, E. Bloch, J. Vaneecloo, L. Boura- chot, G.-J. Both, G. M´ eriaux, S. Dutartre, R. Hostein, J. Paris, B. Ximenez, A. Signoles, A. Browaeys, T. La- haye, and D. Dreon, Phys. Rev. Appl.22, 024073 (2024)

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    H. Zhou, C. Zhao, M. Cain, D. Bluvstein, N. Maskara, C. Duckering, H.-Y. Hu, S.-T. Wang, A. Kubica, and M. D. Lukin, Nature646, 303 (2025)

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    I. N. Ashkarin, S. Lepoutre, P. Pillet, I. I. Beterov, I. I. Ryabtsev, and P. Cheinet, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 013034 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Kurdak, P

    D. Kurdak, P. R. Banner, Y. Li, S. R. Muleady, A. V. Gorshkov, S. L. Rolston, and J. V. Porto, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 123404 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Cesa and J

    A. Cesa and J. Martin, Phys. Rev. A95, 052330 (2017)

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    Sun, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 67, 120311 (2024)

    Y. Sun, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 67, 120311 (2024)

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Doultsinos and D

    G. Doultsinos and D. Petrosyan, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 023246 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Reinhard, T

    A. Reinhard, T. C. Liebisch, B. Knuffman, and G. Raithel, Phys. Rev. A75, 032712 (2007)

    work page 2007

  19. [19]

    Su and W

    S.-L. Su and W. Li, Phys. Rev. A104, 033716 (2021)

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    Y. Chew, T. Tomita, T. P. Mahesh, S. Sugawa, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, and K. Ohmori, Nature Photonics16, 724–729 (2022)

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Symmetry of open quantum systems: Classification of dissi- pative quantum chaos,

    P. M´ ehaignerie, Y. Machu, A. Dur´ an Hern´ andez, G. Creutzer, D. Papoular, J. Raimond, C. Sayrin, and M. Brune, PRX Quantum6, 10.1103/prxquan- tum.6.010353 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquan- 2025

  22. [22]

    Emperauger, M

    G. Emperauger, M. Qiao, G. Bornet, C. Chen, R. Martin, Y. T. Chew, B. G´ ely, L. Klein, D. Barredo, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Phys. Rev. A111, 062806 (2025)

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Giudici, S

    G. Giudici, S. Veroni, G. Giudice, H. Pichler, and J. Zei- her, PRX Quantum6, 030308 (2025)

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    K.-K. Ni, T. Rosenband, and D. D. Grimes, Chem. Sci. 9, 6830 (2018)

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    C. M. Holland, Y. Lu, and L. W. Cheuk, Science382, 1143 (2023)

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

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

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    L. R. B. Picard, A. J. Park, G. E. Patenotte, S. Gebret- sadkan, D. Wellnitz, A. M. Rey, and K.-K. Ni, Nature 637, 821 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    D. K. Ruttley, T. R. Hepworth, A. Guttridge, and S. L. Cornish, Nature637, 827 (2025)

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Jandura and G

    S. Jandura and G. Pupillo, Quantum6, 712 (2022)

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    Pagano, S

    A. Pagano, S. Weber, D. Jaschke, T. Pfau, F. Meinert, S. Montangero, and H. P. B¨ uchler, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033019 (2022)

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    Mohan, R

    M. Mohan, R. de Keijzer, and S. Kokkelmans, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033052 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Khaneja, T

    N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, T. Schulte-Herbr¨ uggen, and S. J. Glaser, Journal of Magnetic Resonance172, 296 (2005). 6

    work page 2005

  33. [33]

    Robicheaux, T

    F. Robicheaux, T. M. Graham, and M. Saffman, Phys. Rev. A103, 022424 (2021)

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    Z. Zuo, M. Fukusen, Y. Tamaki, T. Watanabe, Y. Naka- gawa, and K. Nakagawa, Opt. Express17, 22898 (2009)

    work page 2009

  35. [35]

    Pecorari, S

    L. Pecorari, S. Jandura, and G. Pupillo, Low-depth quan- tum error correction via three-qubit gates in rydberg atom arrays (2025), arXiv:2507.06096 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Phys. Rev. A86, 032324 (2012)

    work page 2012

  37. [37]

    J. Old, S. Tasler, M. J. Hartmann, and M. M¨ uller, Fault- tolerant stabilizer measurements in surface codes with three-qubit gates (2025), arXiv:2506.09029 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Pecorari, S

    L. Pecorari, S. Jandura, G. K. Brennen, and G. Pupillo, Nature Communications16, 1111 (2025)

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    J. M. Baker, A. Litteken, C. Duckering, H. Hoffmann, H. Bernien, and F. T. Chong, in2021 ACM/IEEE 48th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architec- ture (ISCA)(2021) pp. 818–831

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    M. A. Tremblay, N. Delfosse, and M. E. Beverland, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 050504 (2022)

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Bravyi, A

    S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, Nature627, 778–782 (2024)

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    Q. Xu, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, C. A. Pattison, N. Raveen- dran, D. Bluvstein, J. Wurtz, B. Vasi´ c, M. D. Lukin, L. Jiang, and H. Zhou, Nature Physics20, 1084 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    Poole, T

    C. Poole, T. M. Graham, M. A. Perlin, M. Otten, and M. Saffman, Phys. Rev. A111, 022433 (2025)

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    Fast Quantum Gates for Neutral Atoms Separated by a Few Tens of Micrometers

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2010). 7 Supplemental Material for “Fast Quantum Gates for Neutral Atoms Separated by a Few Tens of Micrometers” Choice of the states In this work, we consider atoms of Rubidium-87. In the ground state 5S 1/2, the logical state...

    work page 2010

  45. [45]

    ˇSibali´ c, J

    N. ˇSibali´ c, J. Pritchard, C. Adams, and K. Weatherill, Arc: An open-source library for calculating properties of alkali rydberg atoms, Computer Physics Communications220, 319 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Saffman, T

    M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Quantum information with rydberg atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 2313 (2010)

    work page 2010

  47. [47]

    Chomaz, I

    L. Chomaz, I. Ferrier-Barbut, F. Ferlaino, B. Laburthe-Tolra, B. L. Lev, and T. Pfau, Dipolar physics: a review of experiments with magnetic quantum gases, Reports on Progress in Physics86, 026401 (2022)

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    Emperauger, M

    G. Emperauger, M. Qiao, G. Bornet, C. Chen, R. Martin, Y. T. Chew, B. G´ ely, L. Klein, D. Barredo, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Benchmarking direct and indirect dipolar spin-exchange interactions between two rydberg atoms, Physical Review A111, 10.1103/physreva.111.062806 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.111.062806 2025

  49. [49]

    M. L. Wall, K. Maeda, and L. D. Carr, Realizing unconventional quantum magnetism with symmetric top molecules, New Journal of Physics17, 025001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    K.-K. Ni, T. Rosenband, and D. D. Grimes, Dipolar exchange quantum logic gate with polar molecules, Chem. Sci.9, 6830 (2018)

    work page 2018

  51. [51]

    C. M. Holland, Y. Lu, and L. W. Cheuk, On-demand entanglement of molecules in a reconfigurable optical tweezer array, Science382, 1143 (2023)

    work page 2023

  52. [52]

    Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, L. Anderegg, E. Chae, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, Dipolar spin-exchange and entanglement between molecules in an optical tweezer array, Science382, 1138 (2023)

    work page 2023

  53. [53]

    L. R. B. Picard, A. J. Park, G. E. Patenotte, S. Gebretsadkan, D. Wellnitz, A. M. Rey, and K.-K. Ni, Entanglement and iSWAP gate between molecular qubits, Nature637, 821 (2025)

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    D. K. Ruttley, T. R. Hepworth, A. Guttridge, and S. L. Cornish, Long-lived entanglement of molecules in magic-wavelength optical tweezers, Nature , 1 (2025)

    work page 2025

  55. [55]

    Jandura and G

    S. Jandura and G. Pupillo, Time-Optimal Two- and Three-Qubit Gates for Rydberg Atoms, Quantum6, 712 (2022)

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    Khaneja, T

    N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, T. Schulte-Herbr¨ uggen, and S. J. Glaser, Optimal control of coupled spin dynamics: design of nmr pulse sequences by gradient ascent algorithms, Journal of Magnetic Resonance172, 296 (2005)

    work page 2005

  57. [57]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, ˙I. Polat, Y. Feng, E. W. Moore, J. VanderPlas, D. Laxalde, J. Perktold, R. Cimrman, I. Henriksen,...

    work page 2020

  58. [58]

    Bergonzoni, S

    M. Bergonzoni, S. Jandura, and G. Pupillo, iswap gate with polar molecules: Robustness criteria for entangling operations, Phys. Rev. A112, 032621 (2025). 19

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    R. J. P. T. de Keijzer, O. Tse, and S. J. J. M. F. Kokkelmans, Recapture probability for antitrapped rydberg states in optical tweezers, Phys. Rev. A108, 023122 (2023)

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    Jozsa, Fidelity for mixed quantum states, Journal of Modern Optics41, 2315 (1994), https://doi.org/10.1080/09500349414552171

    R. Jozsa, Fidelity for mixed quantum states, Journal of Modern Optics41, 2315 (1994), https://doi.org/10.1080/09500349414552171

    work page doi:10.1080/09500349414552171 1994

  61. [61]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition(Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    work page 2010

  62. [62]

    transition probability

    A. Uhlmann, The “transition probability” in the state space of a *-algebra, Reports on Mathematical Physics9, 273 (1976)

    work page 1976

  63. [63]

    Giudici, S

    G. Giudici, S. Veroni, G. Giudice, H. Pichler, and J. Zeiher, Fast entangling gates for rydberg atoms via resonant dipole- dipole interaction, PRX Quantum6, 030308 (2025)

    work page 2025