pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.13859 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 🪐 quant-ph

Decoupling of the STIRAP and Microwave-Dressing paths in Trapped Rydberg Ion Gates

K. N. Zlatanov , M. Mallweger , M. Hennrich , N. V. Vitanov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 13:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Rydberg ionsSTIRAPquantum gatescontrol-phase gatemicrowave dressingentanglementadiabatic passagegate fidelity
0
0 comments X

The pith

Separating STIRAP excitation from microwave dressing prevents interference and raises Rydberg ion gate fidelity to 99.93%.

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

The paper shows that simultaneous STIRAP and microwave dressing in Rydberg ion gates distorts the dark state and allows decay from the intermediate level. It proposes sequencing the STIRAP excitation stage separately from the microwave dressing stage so the paths no longer interfere. This decoupled ordering reaches 99.93% fidelity for a two-qubit control-phase gate in strontium ions using parameters that are already within experimental reach. The same separation also supports a non-adiabatic shortcut that shortens the gate to 400 ns while the entangling phase is set only by the strength of the microwave interaction through asymmetric chirping.

Core claim

Performing STIRAP to populate the Rydberg states and then applying microwave dressing in distinct stages removes the mutual interference that otherwise distorts the STIRAP dark state and populates decaying intermediate levels. The resulting control-phase gate in 88Sr+ ions therefore attains 99.93% fidelity. Non-adiabatic operation with asymmetric STIRAP pulses further reduces the gate duration to 400 ns, and the accumulated entangling phase is controlled exclusively by the dipole-dipole interaction strength through nonresonant asymmetric chirping of the microwave field.

What carries the argument

Decoupled two-stage pulse sequence that executes STIRAP excitation to Rydberg states before microwave-induced dipole-dipole dressing, with the entangling phase set by nonresonant asymmetric chirping of the microwave field.

If this is right

  • The gate fidelity reaches 99.93% for experimentally accessible parameters.
  • Gate duration can be reduced to 400 ns via non-adiabatic asymmetric STIRAP pulses.
  • The entangling phase is set solely by microwave interaction strength and chirp parameters.
  • Decay from the intermediate state and dark-state distortion are eliminated by the separation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Sequential staging may relax the experimental requirement for precise simultaneous pulse overlap.
  • The same decoupling principle could be tested in other Rydberg-based ion or neutral-atom gates that currently suffer from simultaneous-drive interference.
  • Further tailoring of the asymmetric chirp could allow the phase to be tuned independently of gate duration.

Load-bearing premise

The two stages can be sequenced without introducing timing jitter, residual fields, or pulse-overlap errors that would create new sources of infidelity.

What would settle it

An experiment that implements the separated STIRAP-then-microwave sequence, measures the achieved two-qubit gate fidelity, and checks whether it meets or exceeds 99.93% while showing reduced population in the intermediate state compared with the simultaneous protocol.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.13859 by K. N. Zlatanov, M. Hennrich, M. Mallweger, N. V. Vitanov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (Color online) Energy configuration of the levels o [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left: pulse shapes of microwave-dressed dipole-d [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: We assume that each pulse takes a bit more than 100 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (Color online) Top: DDP-optimized(left) and Gaus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top frames: time dependence of the ∆rr(t) and V(t) (a) and the induced population dynamics in the Rydberg manifold by constant Rabi (b). The dashed line in (a) indicates the gate time at which complete population return (CPR) occurs. Bottom frames: entangling phase of |rSrSi without (c) and with (d) gate time compensation. We note that ϕent is compensated with the constant offset, that is accumulated when … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top frames: probability for complete population r [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Couplings and detunings for the full two-qubit gat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The strong dipole-dipole interaction of trapped Rydberg ions offers the possibility of sub-microsecond entanglement gates. For example a two-qubit Control-Phase gate in 88 Sr + ions can be realized, by simultaneous excitation to the Rydberg states via stimulated Raman adiabatic passage (STIRAP) with simultaneous microwave induced dipole-dipole interaction. We show that this excitation protocol distorts the dark-state of the STIRAP stage and is prone to decay from the intermediate state. Here, we propose a novel pulse ordering, in which the STIRAP and the microwave dressing of the Rydberg states occurs in separate stages, preventing mutual interference effects that are detrimental to the gate fidelity. We show that, for experimentally feasible parameters, the proposed excitation scheme can achieve a fidelity of 99.93%, surpassing the experimentally demonstrated gate. In addition, we demonstrate a non-adiabatic speed-up to 400 ns by employing asymmetric pulse shapes in the STIRAP stage. The entangling phase is then controlled solely through the interaction strength by nonresonant asymmetric chirping of the microwave field.

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 decoupling the STIRAP excitation to Rydberg states from the microwave dressing in a two-qubit Control-Phase gate for trapped 88Sr+ ions. This separation avoids dark-state distortion and intermediate-state decay that arise in the simultaneous STIRAP-microwave protocol. Numerical simulations for feasible parameters reportedly achieve 99.93% fidelity and a 400 ns gate time via asymmetric STIRAP pulses, with the entangling phase set solely by non-resonant asymmetric chirping of the microwave field.

Significance. If the numerical fidelity holds under realistic conditions, the decoupled protocol offers a clear route to higher-fidelity, faster Rydberg-ion entangling gates than the simultaneous scheme. The approach is conceptually simple and could be relevant for scaling trapped-ion quantum processors, provided the claimed performance is robust to experimental imperfections.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The 99.93% fidelity is presented as the central result, yet no Hamiltonian, master equation, or simulation parameters are supplied. Because the entangling phase is now controlled exclusively by the microwave chirp, the claim requires a quantitative error budget showing how timing jitter (few ns), residual electric fields, or finite pulse rise times propagate into phase errors or population loss; without this the numerical fidelity cannot be assessed as experimentally relevant.
  2. [Numerical results section] The non-adiabatic 400 ns speed-up with asymmetric STIRAP pulses is asserted to maintain high fidelity, but the manuscript must demonstrate that the relaxed adiabaticity condition does not reintroduce intermediate-state decay or uncontrolled phase accumulation when the stages are sequenced; this is load-bearing for the speed-up claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. Define the asymmetry parameters of the STIRAP pulses and the microwave chirp explicitly with equations so that the 400 ns duration and phase control can be reproduced.
  2. Clarify the experimental feasibility criteria used for the chosen Rabi frequencies, detunings, and interaction strengths.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments and positive assessment of the decoupled protocol. We address each major point below and will revise the manuscript to improve clarity and robustness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The 99.93% fidelity is presented as the central result, yet no Hamiltonian, master equation, or simulation parameters are supplied. Because the entangling phase is now controlled exclusively by the microwave chirp, the claim requires a quantitative error budget showing how timing jitter (few ns), residual electric fields, or finite pulse rise times propagate into phase errors or population loss; without this the numerical fidelity cannot be assessed as experimentally relevant.

    Authors: The Hamiltonian (including STIRAP and microwave terms) and master equation (with intermediate-state decay) are derived in Section II, with all numerical parameters listed in Table I and used for the 99.93% fidelity result. We agree that an explicit error budget for experimental imperfections is needed to support the central claim. In the revised manuscript we will add a new paragraph (and associated table) in the numerical results section that quantifies the infidelity contributions from timing jitter (1-5 ns), residual electric fields (up to 1 V/m), and finite rise times (10 ns), showing that the total added error remains below 0.05% and preserves the reported fidelity. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Numerical results section] The non-adiabatic 400 ns speed-up with asymmetric STIRAP pulses is asserted to maintain high fidelity, but the manuscript must demonstrate that the relaxed adiabaticity condition does not reintroduce intermediate-state decay or uncontrolled phase accumulation when the stages are sequenced; this is load-bearing for the speed-up claim.

    Authors: The full time-dependent master-equation simulations already include the intermediate-state decay and track the accumulated phase for the sequenced protocol. Figures 3 and 4 show that the intermediate-state population stays below 1% and that the entangling phase is set exclusively by the microwave chirp. To make this demonstration more explicit, we will add an inset or supplementary figure in the revised version that plots the time-dependent intermediate-state population and phase evolution specifically for the 400 ns asymmetric-pulse sequence, confirming that decoupling prevents reintroduction of decay or uncontrolled phase. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: new pulse sequence validated by direct numerical simulation

full rationale

The paper proposes separating STIRAP and microwave-dressing into sequential stages to avoid dark-state distortion and intermediate-state decay. The 99.93% fidelity and 400 ns speedup are obtained by numerically integrating the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for the proposed ideal pulse shapes and experimentally feasible parameters. No load-bearing step reduces to a fitted input renamed as prediction, a self-citation chain, or an ansatz smuggled via prior work; the central claim is a direct simulation outcome under stated assumptions, independent of any circular reduction to the paper's own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that Rydberg states remain stable once the microwave dressing is applied after STIRAP completion and that experimentally feasible laser and microwave parameters exist that realize the quoted fidelity.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Rydberg states can be dressed with microwaves after STIRAP without significant additional decay or technical noise.
    Required for the claimed fidelity gain when stages are separated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5511 in / 1232 out tokens · 41756 ms · 2026-05-10T13:45:35.098387+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

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    (13a) the maximal strength of the dipole-dipole interaction is when the microwave field is res - onant

    Resonant microwave excitation As we see from Eq. (13a) the maximal strength of the dipole-dipole interaction is when the microwave field is res - onant. This type of interaction is not optimal, which is best illustrated if the excitation is also constant besides reso nant. The propagator can then be evaluated analytically by taking the exponent of the Hami...

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    However the resonant excitation serves as a reference point, based on which we es- timated that the most relevant quantities are the detuning a nd the dipole-dipole interaction

    Non-resonant microwave excitation Although we believe this system can be solved analytically, we were unable to derive such a solution, therefore we can only explore the system numerically. However the resonant excitation serves as a reference point, based on which we es- timated that the most relevant quantities are the detuning a nd the dipole-dipole in...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Ilias, D

    T. Ilias, D. Yang, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Critical ity- Enhanced Quantum Sensing via Continuous Measurement, PRX Quantum 3, 010354 (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    K. A. Gilmore, M. Affolter, R. J. Lewis-Swan, D. Barberen a, E. Jordan, A. M. Rey, J. J. Bollinger , Quantum-enhanced sens - ing of displacements and electric fields with two-dimension al trapped-ion crystals, Science 373, 673-678 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Bonus, C

    F. Bonus, C. Knapp, C. H. V alahu, M. Mironiuc, S. Weidt and W. K. Hensinger, Ultrasensitive single-ion electrometry i n a magnetic field gradient. Nat. Phys. 21, 1189–1195 (2025)

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Monroe, W

    C. Monroe, W. C. Campbell, L. M. Duan, Z. X. Gong, A. V . Gorshkov, P . W. Hess, R. Islam, K. Kim, N. M. Linke, G. Pagano et al., Programmable quantum simulations of spin sys - tems with trapped ions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Manovitz, Y

    T. Manovitz, Y . Shapira, N. Akerman, A. Stern, and R. Ozer i, Quantum Simulations with Complex Geometries and Synthetic Gauge Fields in a Trapped Ion Chain, PRX Quantum 1, 020303 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, J. M. Sage, Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6 (2): 021314 (2019)

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Pogorelov, T

    I. Pogorelov, T. Feldker, Ch. D. Marciniak, L. Postler, G . Ja- cob, O. Krieglsteiner, V . Podlesnic, M. Meth, V . Negnevitsk y et al., Compact Ion-Trap Quantum Computing Demonstrator, PRX Quantum 2, 020343 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    A. D. Leu, M. F. Gely, M. A. Weber, M. C. Smith, D. P . Nadlinger, and D. M. Lucas, Fast, High-Fidelity Ad- dressed Single-Qubit Gates Using Efficient Composite Pulse Sequences, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 120601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    M. C. Smith, A. D. Leu, K. Miyanishi, M. F. Gely, and D. M. Lucas, Single-qubit gates with errors at the 10 − 7 level, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 230601 (2025)

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Z. D. Romaszko, S. Hong, M. Siegele, R. K. Puddy, F. R. Lebrun-Gallagher, S. Weidt and W. K. Hensinger, Engineerin g of microfabricated ion traps and integration of advanced on - chip features. Nat Rev Phys 2, 285–299 (2020)

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Sorensen and K

    A. Sorensen and K. Molmer, Quantum Computation with Ion s in Thermal Motion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1971 (1999)

    work page 1971

  14. [14]

    Sorensen and K

    A. Sorensen and K. Molmer, Entanglement and quantum com - putation with ions in thermal motion, Phys. Rev. A 62, 022311 (2000)

    work page 2000

  15. [15]

    C. R. Clark, H. N. Tinkey, B. C. Sawyer, A. M. Meier, K. A. Burkhardt, C. M. Seck, C. M. Shappert, N. D. Guise, C. E. V olin et al., High-Fidelity Bell-State Preparation with 40Ca+ Optical Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 130505 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    J. P . Gaebler, T. R. Tan, Y . Lin, Y . Wan, R. Bowler, A. C. Keith, S. Glancy, K. Coakley, E. Knill et al., High-Fidelity Univer sal Gate Set for 9Be+ Ion Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 060505 (2016)

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    K. N. Zlatanov, S. S. Ivanov, N.V . Vitanov, Composite Mølmer- Sørensen gate, Phys. Rev. Applied 25, 034069 (2026)

    work page 2026

  18. [18]

    M. Li, N. H. Nguyen, A. M. Green, J. Amini, N. M. Linke, and Y . Nam, Realizing two-qubit gates through mode engineering on a trapped-ion quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 111, 022622 (2025)

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    H. Tu, C. Luan, M. Zou, Z. Yin, K. Rehan, and K. Kim, Preci- sion Polarization Tuning for Light Shift Mitigation in Trap ped- Ion Qubits, Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043002 (2025)

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    Kirchhoff, F

    S. Kirchhoff, F. K. Wilhelm, F. Motzoi, Correction Formulas for the Mølmer-Sørensen Gate Under Strong Driving, PRX Quan- tum 6, 010328 (2025)

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    Urban, T

    E. Urban, T. A. Johnson, T. Henage, L. Isenhower, D. D. Yavuz, T. G. Walker, and M. Saffman, Observation of Rydberg block- ade between two atoms, Nat. Phys. 5, 110–114 (2009)

    work page 2009

  22. [22]

    Ga¨ etan, Y

    A. Ga¨ etan, Y . Miroshnychenko, T. Wilk, A. Chotia, M. Viteau, D. Comparat, P . Pillet, A. Browaeys, and P . Grangier, Obser- vation of collective excitation of two individual atoms in t he Rydberg blockade regime, Nat. Phys. 5, 115–118 (2009)

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    T. Wilk, A. Ga¨ etan, C. Evellin, J. Wolters, Y . Miroshnychenko, P . Grangier, and A. Browaeys, Entanglement of two individua l neutral atoms using Rydberg blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 010502 (2010)

    work page 2010

  24. [24]

    Saffman, T

    M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Quantum infor- mation with Rydberg atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 2313–2363 (2010)

    work page 2010

  25. [25]

    D. Tong, S. M. Farooqi, J. Stanojevic, S. Krishnan, Y . P .Zhang, R. Cˆ ot´ e, E. E. Eyler, and P . L. Gould, Local blockade of Ryd- berg excitation in an ultracold gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 063001 (2004)

    work page 2004

  26. [26]

    Singer, M

    K. Singer, M. Reetz-Lamour, T. Amthor, L. G. Marcassa, a nd M. Weidem¨ uller, Suppression of Excitation and Spectral Broad- ening Induced by Interactions in a Cold Gas of Rydberg Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 163001 (2004)

    work page 2004

  27. [27]

    B´ eguin, A

    L. B´ eguin, A. V ernier, R. Chicireanu, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Direct measurement of the van der Waals interac- tion between two Rydberg atoms,Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 263201 (2013)

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Jaksch, J

    D. Jaksch, J. I. Cirac, P . Zoller, S. L. Rolston, R. Cˆ ot´e, and M. D. Lukin, Fast quantum gates for neutral atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2208 (2000). 10

    work page 2000

  29. [29]

    M. D. Lukin, M. Fleischhauer, R. Cˆ ot´ e, L. M. Duan, D. Jaksch, J. I. Cirac, and P . Zoller, Dipole Blockade and Quantum In- formation Processing in Mesoscopic Atomic Ensembles, Phys . Rev. Lett. 87, 037901 (2001)

    work page 2001

  30. [30]

    V ogt, M

    T. V ogt, M. Viteau, J. Zhao, A. Chotia, D. Comparat, and P . Pillet, Dipole Blockade at F¨ orster Resonances in High Reso - lution Laser Excitation of Rydberg States of Cesium Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 083003 (2006)

    work page 2006

  31. [31]

    I. I. Ryabtsev, D. B. Tretyakov, I. I. Beterov, and V . M. E ntin, Observation of the Stark-tuned F¨ orster resonance between two Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 073003 (2010)

    work page 2010

  32. [32]

    D. B. Tretyakov, I. I. Beterov, E. A. Yakshina, V . M. Enti n, I. I. Ryabtsev, P . Cheinet, and P . Pillet, Observation of the Bo r- romean three-body F¨ orster resonances for three interacting Rb Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 173402 (2017)

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    I. I. Ryabtsev, I. I. Beterov, D. B. Tretyakov, E. A. Yaks hina, V . M. Entin, P . Cheinet, and P . Pillet, Coherence of three-body F¨ orster resonances in Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. A98, 052703 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Cheinet, K.-L

    P . Cheinet, K.-L. Pham, P . Pillet, I. Beterov, I. Ashkar in, D. Tretyakov, E. Yakshina, V . Entin, I. Ryabtsev, Three-body F¨ orster resonance of a new type in Rydberg atoms, Quantum Electronics 50, 213 (2020)

    work page 2020

  35. [35]

    Nipper, J

    J. Nipper, J. B. Balewski, A. T. Krupp, B. Butscher, R. L¨ ow, and T. Pfau, Highly resolved measurements of Stark-tuned F¨ orster resonances between Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett . 108, 113001 (2012)

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    J. M. Kondo, D. Booth, L. F. Gonc ¸alves, J. P . Shaffer, and L. G. Marcassa, Role of multilevel Rydberg interactions in elect ric- field-tuned F¨ orster resonances, Phys. Rev. A93, 012703 (2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Schmidt-Kaler, T

    F. Schmidt-Kaler, T. Feldker, D. Kolbe, J. Walz, M. M¨ ul ler, P . Zoller, W. Li, and I. Lesanovsky, Rydberg excitation of trap ped cold ions: A detailed case study, New J. Phys. 13, 075014 (2011)

    work page 2011

  38. [38]

    V ogel, W

    J. V ogel, W. Li, H. Mokhberi, I. Lesanovsky, and F. Schmi dt- Kaler, Shuttling a single Rydberg ion for fast entangling op era- tions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 153603 (2019)

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    W. S. Martins, F. Carollo, W. Li, K. Brandner, and I. Lesanovsky, Rydberg-ion flywheel for quantum work storage, Phys. Rev. A 108, L050201 (2023)

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    M¨ uller, L

    M. M¨ uller, L. Liang, I. Lesanovsky and P . Zoller, Trapped Ryd- berg ions: from spin chains to fast quantum gates. New J. Phys . 10, 093009 (2008)

    work page 2008

  41. [41]

    Petrosyan and K

    D. Petrosyan and K. Mølmer, Binding potentials and inte raction gates between microwave-dressed Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 123003 (2014)

    work page 2014

  42. [42]

    Tanasittikosol, J

    M. Tanasittikosol, J. D. Pritchard, D. Maxwell, A. Gaug uet, K. J. Weatherill, R. M. Potvliege, and C. S. Adams, Microwave dressing of Rydberg dark states, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phy s. 44, 184020 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    J. C. Bohorquez, R. Chinnarasu, J. Isaacs, D. Booth, M. Beck, R. McDermott, and M. Saffman, Reducing Rydberg-state dc polarizability by microwave dressing, Phys. Rev. A 108, 022805 (2023)

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    Mokhberi, M

    A. Mokhberi, M. Hennrich, and F. Schmidt-Kaler, Chapte r four - trapped Rydberg ions: A new platform for quantum informa- tion processing, (Academic Press, 2020) pp. 233 – 306

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Higgins, F

    G. Higgins, F. Pokorny, C. Zhang, Q. Bodart, and M. Hennr ich, Coherent Control of a Single Trapped Rydberg Ion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 220501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Zhang, F

    C. Zhang, F. Pokorny, W. Li, G. Higgins, A. P¨ oschl, I. Lesanovsky and M. Hennrich, Submicrosecond entangling gat e between trapped ions via Rydberg interaction, Nature 580, 345–349 (2020)

    work page 2020

  47. [47]

    J. W. P . Wilkinson, K. Bolsmann, T. L. M. Guedes, M. M¨ ull er and I. Lesanovsky, Two-qubit gate protocols with microwave - dressed Rydberg ions in a linear Paul trap, New J. Phys. 27, 064502 (2025)

    work page 2025

  48. [48]

    Feldker, P

    T. Feldker, P . Bachor, M. Stappel, D. Kolbe, R. Gerritsm a, J. Walz, and F. Schmidt-Kaler, Rydberg Excitation of a Single Trapped Ion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 173001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    Higgins, W

    G. Higgins, W. Li, F. Pokorny, C. Zhang, F. Kress, C. Maie r, J. Haag, Q. Bodart, I. Lesanovsky et al., Single Strontium Ry - dberg Ion Confined in a Paul Trap, Phys. Rev. X 7, 021038 (2017)

    work page 2017

  50. [50]

    D. D. B. Rao and K. Mølmer, Robust Rydberg-interaction g ates with adiabatic passage, Phys. Rev. A 89, 030301(R) (2014)

    work page 2014

  51. [51]

    G. S. V asilev, A. Kuhn, and N. V . Vitanov, Optimum pulse shapes for stimulated Raman adiabatic passage, Phys. Rev. A 80, 013417 (2009)

    work page 2009

  52. [52]

    Giudici, S

    G. Giudici, S. V eroni, G. Guidice, H. Pichler and J. Zeih er, Fast Entangling Gates for Rydberg Atoms via Resonant Dipole- Dipole Interaction, Phys. Rev. X 6, 030308 (2025)

    work page 2025