Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 51 references

This paper claims that coherent spin rotations in Ge/Si hole-spin quantum dots can implement universal reversible classical logic—an iToffoli gate driven by all-DC hopping pulses—with inputs and outputs in classical basis states and no algo

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review

2026-08-02 08:16 UTC pith:RGOCSMWH

load-bearing objection A serious all-DC iToffoli proposal for Ge/Si hole spins, but the below-Landauer energy headline is off by ~10^3 as printed unless a missing k_geom is supplied. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.06219 v3 pith:RGOCSMWH submitted 2026-07-07 cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph

Classical Reversible Computation by Quantum Coherence

Daniel Loss This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph PACS 03.67.Lx85.35.Gv
keywords reversible computationiToffoli gatespin quantum dotsGe/Si hole spinshopping controlLandauer limitanisotropic exchangecoherent spin dynamics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper proposes that reversible classical computation need not rely on adiabatic CMOS charge motion; instead, coherent spin dynamics in Ge/Si hole-spin quantum dots can implement a universal reversible gate while keeping inputs and outputs classical. The central object is an iToffoli gate built from a three-spin C1–T–C2 cell in which the target spin hops between two dots with different quantization axes under all-DC voltage pulses. Simulations with experimentally calibrated parameters reproduce the Toffoli truth table with a worst-case full-state error of 0.53% and predict a testable two-parameter error landscape. Because the gate energy is dominated by dielectric loss in femtofarad gates, the per-gate cost is about 0.10 k_B T ln2 at 4 K—roughly 4×10^7 below a room-temperature CMOS Toffoli. If correct, the same semiconductor platform would support both quantum algorithms and reversible classical logic.

Core claim

The paper asserts that the iToffoli gate—universal for reversible Boolean logic when combined with NOT—can be implemented by coherent unitary spin rotations without algorithmic use of superposition: only the spin-up/down basis states serve as logical inputs and outputs. The gate consists of a target spin shuttled between two quantum dots whose quantization axes are tilted by Φ=44.7°, while two control spins occupy classical eigenstates; anisotropic exchange with r=J_zz/J_⊥=8 shifts the target precession frequency only when both controls are down, so a sequence of DC detuning pulses gives the target an odd π rotation in that sector and near-identity evolution in the other three. The authors s

What carries the argument

The iToffoli gate is the load-bearing object: a three-spin C1–T–C2 cell in which the target spin hops between dots A and B whose spin-quantization axes enclose the angle Φ. The anisotropic exchange tensor J0 = diag(J_⊥, J_⊥, J_zz) with r=J_zz/J_⊥≈8 makes the target precession frequency conditionally shifted only in the |↓↓⟩ control sector, so a piecewise-constant DC pulse sequence (dwell times t_A, t_B repeated N=6 times) implements a controlled π-rotation. The mechanism is charge-adiabatic but spin-diabatic: the hole follows the lower orbital branch while the spin does not follow the changing local axis, so all control operations are DC voltage detuning pulses rather than microwave drive. T

Load-bearing premise

The gate dynamics assume the spin-diabatic/charge-adiabatic limit with an instantaneous change of the target quantization axis during each hop, plus a diagonal, bond-symmetric exchange tensor J0=diag(J_⊥,J_⊥,J_zz) with r=8 and J_A≈J_B to within ~1%; if off-diagonal/DM terms, bond mismatch, or finite hopping-time effects violate these conditions, the simulated 0.53% gate error and the F=81 truth-table margin would not hold.

What would settle it

A concrete experiment: implement the four-dot C1–T–C2 cell in a Ge/Si hole-spin array and run the twelve-hop DC pulse sequence at Scenario II parameters. If the maximum error over all eight classical input–output pairs exceeds the F=81 threshold of ~1.13%, or if the measured error landscape does not show the predicted secular-suppression recovery at control Zeeman bias Δω_C/2π≳500 MHz, the central claim would be refuted. Additionally, measuring J_A and J_B during a hop would directly test the bond-symmetry requirement: a mismatch beyond ~1% at fixed pulse timing would invalidate the reported e

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Because Toffoli plus NOT is universal for reversible Boolean logic, the iToffoli cell makes reversible classical computing realizable in Ge/Si hole-spin hardware using DC-only control.
  • The per-gate energy of about 0.10 k_B T ln2 at 4 K sits below the Landauer scale, so uncomputed reversible logic need not dissipate Landauer energy at every step.
  • Since spin shuttling transports bits without measurement, logic and data movement remain reversible until readout, eliminating the memory-to-logic traffic that dominates CMOS energy budgets.
  • The gate passes the F=81 majority-vote threshold at Scenario II across the reported hopping angles, indicating a finite margin for fixed-pulse operation.
  • The same anisotropic exchange also yields a fast nearest-neighbor CNOT and SWAP by decomposition, so routing and reconfiguration stay within a one-dimensional chain.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: The headline ~4×10^7 advantage over CMOS excludes control electronics and refrigeration; folding those in—as the paper's Models A/C do—shrinks the advantage to roughly 10^5–10^6×, and the gap will depend strongly on the target error rate.
  • Inference: The mechanism is not obviously unique to Ge/Si: any material with strongly anisotropic exchange and a tunable g-tensor could host an iToffoli cell, making 28Si with a micromagnet (Scenario III) or other hole-spin platforms natural testbeds if sub-picosecond pulse timing is achievable.
  • Inference: Because the Ising protocol is scale-invariant under uniform scaling of ω_T and J_zz, one could push t_gate well below 172 ns in higher-field or higher-g-factor devices, lowering the energy–delay product without changing the per-hop energy.
  • Inference: The error landscape suggests a practical device-design rule: maximize exchange anisotropy ratio r and decouple Δω_C from ω_T (e.g., with a micromagnet) to move from the Scenario I threshold edge into the broad-margin Scenario II regime.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a scheme for classical reversible computation using coherent spin dynamics in Ge/Si hole-spin quantum dots. The central building block is an iToffoli gate implemented by all-DC hopping pulses that rotate the target spin conditionally on two control spins. The authors simulate the eight-dimensional unitary for a C1–T–C2 chain with exchange anisotropy, report a truth-table error of ε_full=0.53% at a specific operating point (Scenario II), and claim a per-gate dissipation of ~0.10 k_B T ln2 at 4 K, below the Landauer scale, corresponding to ~4×10^7 advantage over a CMOS Toffoli. The paper also outlines a testable error landscape in (r, ΔωC), estimates shuttling and readout costs, and proposes a circuit-level blueprint.

Significance. If the central claims held, the paper would be a significant conceptual and practical contribution: it would demonstrate a reversible logic gate in semiconductor spin hardware using only baseband voltage pulses, with a falsifiable error landscape and a plausible path toward dual-use quantum/classical hardware. The gate mechanism is grounded in cited experiments (Ref. [12]) and the simulation methodology is transparent. However, the headline energy advantage rests on a numerical value that is not reproducible from Eq. (5) with the stated parameters, and the main-text error rates are computed under an idealized exchange tensor. The proposal's broader interest depends on these points being resolved.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, Eq. (5)] The claim E_gate ≃4×10^-24 J (0.10 k_B T ln2 at 4 K) is not consistent with the stated parameters. With Cg tanδ=10^-18 F and ΔV=20 mV, Eq. (5) gives E_hop = 4×10^-22 J (for k_geom=1), so E_gate=12 E_hop = 4.8×10^-21 J = 125 k_B T ln2. To reach the quoted value, k_geom would need to be ≈8×10^-4. The main text gives no expression or physical justification for k_geom; 'geometry factor independent of pulse rise time' does not supply this. Since the abstract, Fig. 4, and all CMOS comparisons use the quoted value, this is a load-bearing quantitative claim. The derivation in SI §13 must be shown in the main text or the numbers revised.
  2. [§3, Eq. (3), Scenario II] The quoted truth-table error ε_full=0.53% is computed under the diagonal, bond-symmetric exchange tensor J0=diag(J⊥,J⊥,Jzz) and with J_A≈J_B. The manuscript states that off-diagonal/DM terms and bond-dependent variations are analyzed in SI §32, but no results appear in the main text. The robustness of the gate to these physically expected terms is therefore not demonstrated in the paper as presented. If the SI supplies such simulations, the main text should cite a quantitative bound; otherwise the gate error and the F=81 margin are conditional on an idealized Hamiltonian.
  3. [§4 and Fig. 4] The comparison in Fig. 4 and the text to a CMOS Toffoli relies directly on the erroneous E_gate; with the arithmetic above, the claimed ~4×10^7 advantage becomes ~3×10^4 (still substantial but qualitatively different, and the 'below Landauer' statement is no longer true). Thus the error propagates to the central conclusions. The gate error and energy are otherwise well-posed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4, Eq. (5)] The symbol k_geom is introduced but never defined or bounded in the main text; even a brief indication of its physical origin (e.g., fraction of the gate capacitance participating in loss) would help.
  2. [§2] The term 'iToffoli' is used without explanation; please define the 'i' (inverted Toffoli) in the first occurrence.
  3. [§3] The text states 'Scale-invariance ... allows much shorter gate times' but does not give the scaling relation; a formula would clarify the parameter limits.
  4. [Fig. 4] The energy hierarchy plot would benefit from a logarithmic axis label and explicit units; currently the numerical ratios are given only in the caption.
  5. [References] Reference [51] has 'DOI to be assigned upon publication'; a published version should provide a specific DOI or repository link.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the gate truth table and error landscape are simulated from calibrated experimental parameters; the energy headline has an arithmetic/support gap (unstated k_geom) but is not circular.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. The iToffoli truth table is obtained by numerically exponentiating the three-spin Hamiltonian (Eqs. 2-4) with experimentally calibrated parameters (Phi=44.7 deg, Jzz/2pi=40 MHz, Delta-omega_C, g-factor splittings) and optimizing dwell times tA,tB; the error landscape epsilon_full(r,Delta-omega_C) is then computed by scanning model parameters, not by fitting to the target truth table. The exchange-anisotropy range r~7-10 and T1 values come from published Ge/Si experiments, including works co-authored by the author; these are independent, externally falsifiable measurements, so self-citation is not load-bearing. The central quantitative energy claim does have a support gap: Eq. (5) with the paper's own values gives 12 * 10^-18 F * (20 mV)^2 = 4.8e-21 J before k_geom, so E_gate=4e-24 J requires an unstated k_geom ~ 8e-4. That is an arithmetic/support issue, not a definitional circle, and is noted here for completeness without raising the circularity score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proposal relies on experimentally calibrated device parameters (Φ, T1, T2*, Cg tanδ) and on chosen operating points (r, ΔωC, dwell times) that are not independently measured for this gate. The key unstated quantity is k_geom, which controls the headline energy claim. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • dwell times tA, tB and hop count N = tA=17.30ns, tB=18.90ns, N=6 (Ising reference); Scenario II times unspecified
    Numerically optimized to make the simulated iToffoli truth table correct; these are design/fitted parameters, not independently measured.
  • exchange anisotropy r=Jzz/J⊥ and Jzz/2π = r=8, Jzz/2π=40 MHz (Scenario II)
    Chosen operating point within measured Ge range r≈7–10; the gate error and energy depend on this choice.
  • control Zeeman bias ΔωC/2π = 87.5 MHz (native) or 960 MHz (micromagnet)
    Design parameter set by g-factor asymmetry/micromagnet; central to flip-flop suppression.
  • geometry factor k_geom = not stated; implied ≈8×10^-4 by Eq. (5) numbers
    Appears in energy Eq. (5) but its value is not given in main text; the headline energy depends on it.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The three-spin cell is described by the anisotropic Heisenberg Hamiltonian Eq. (2) with diagonal exchange J0 and no significant off-diagonal/DM terms.
    The paper cites theoretical/experimental support [27–30] but the simulation uses this simplification; off-diagonal effects deferred to SI §32.
  • domain assumption Hopping is charge-adiabatic and spin-diabatic: the target quantization axis changes instantaneously on each hop.
    Central to the conditional-rotation mechanism; validated only in SI §§5,7, not in main text.
  • domain assumption Controls remain in classical eigenstates (no superposition) and readout is projective Mz.
    Defines the classical reversible operating mode and makes iToffoli equivalent to Toffoli.
  • standard math The Landauer bound and dielectric-loss model Eq. (5) apply to the gate energy accounting.
    Establishes the energy comparison; Eq. (5) is a standard dielectric-loss form.
  • domain assumption Coherent shuttling moves spins without measurement and without erasure, so data movement remains reversible.
    Supported by cited experiments [12–14], but the reversible-computation claim depends on it.

reviewed 2026-08-02 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Classical Reversible Computation by Quantum Coherence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RGOCSMWH

@misc{pith2026260706219,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Classical Reversible Computation by Quantum Coherence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RGOCSMWH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.06219}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Rising energy demand from data-center and AI applications has renewed interest in reversible computation, where logic need not dissipate heat at every step if information is uncomputed. Implementations have so far been classical: adiabatic CMOS reduces dissipation by slowing charge motion but is still limited by the threshold physics of transistors. Here we propose classical reversible logic implemented by coherent spin dynamics in a spin quantum-dot array, with inputs and outputs in classical basis states and no algorithmic use of superposition. The same spin stores, transports, and computes, with unitary rotation replacing irreversible switching. The universal building block is an iToffoli gate driven by DC voltage pulses and anisotropic exchange in Ge/Si hole spins. Simulations with experimental parameters reproduce the Toffoli truth table and yield a testable error landscape. Because shuttling transports the bit without measurement, logic and data movement remain reversible until readout. Millivolt pulses on femtofarad gates yield a gate energy below the 4 K Landauer scale, about five (eight) orders of magnitude below a room-temperature CMOS Toffoli with (without) 4 K cooling overhead. The same semiconductor hardware is therefore dual-use, supporting quantum algorithms when superposition is used and classical reversible logic otherwise.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06219 by Daniel Loss.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Device regimes for classical and quantum information processing. Conven￾tional CMOS (irreversible classical), adiabatic CMOS (classical reversible by quasi-adiabatic charge motion), quantum processors (unitary, using superposition), and the present proposal (classical re￾versible truth tables by coherent spin dynamics, basis-state inputs and outputs). gate supports ∼ 105 operations per T1 at dilution-fridg… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Hopping iToffoli cell and conditional target dynamics. a, Four-dot C1–T–C2 cell: the target spin hops between dots A and B under DC detuning pulses; the two target dots have local quantisation axes separated by angle Φ. The auxiliary dot may be lateral or vertical; vertical hole double dots have been demonstrated in strained Ge double wells [25]. Arrows denote charge￾adiabatic, spin-diabatic transfers. b, … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Error landscape. a, iToffoli gate error εfull (maximum over all eight classical inputs) versus exchange anisotropy r = Jzz/J⊥, at fixed control Zeeman bias ∆ωC/2π = 87.5 MHz and Φ = 44.7 ◦ ; the gate requires strong anisotropy (r ≳ 8), and the measured Ge-hole range r ≃ 7–10 (shaded) brackets the operating point at the F = 81 threshold (εfull ≤ 1.13%, dashed). b, εfull versus control Zeeman bias ∆ωC/2π at … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Energy hierarchy. Cold-device energies at 4 K for spin operations. For reference, the dotted vertical line marks the asymptotic ∼ 10 aJ per-transistor switching floor set by the Vdd ≥ 500 mV ‘Boltzmann tyranny’ [6], and the grey bar marks a CMOS Toffoli built from ∼ 16 such switches (∼ 1.6 × 10−16 J in total, SI §26). The gate-to-CMOS energy ratio is ∼ 4 × 107× (system-level reductions in text). Spin energ… view at source ↗

Review history (3 revisions) →

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

51 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    IEA, Paris (2025)

    International Energy Agency.Energy and AI. IEA, Paris (2025)

    2025

  2. [2]

    Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process.IBM J

    Landauer, R. Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process.IBM J. Res. Dev.5, 183–191 (1961)

    1961

  3. [3]

    Bennett, C. H. Logical reversibility of computation.IBM J. Res. Dev.17, 525–532 (1973)

    1973

  4. [4]

    & Toffoli, T

    Fredkin, E. & Toffoli, T. Conservative logic.Int. J. Theor. Phys.21, 219–253 (1982)

    1982

  5. [5]

    Frank, M. P. & Edwards, M. A. Industry perspective: Limits of energy efficiency for conventional CMOS and the need for adiabatic reversible computing.APL Electron. Devices1, 030902 (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    & Radosavljevic, M

    Datta, S., Chakraborty, W. & Radosavljevic, M. Toward attojoule switching energy in logic transistors.Science378, 733–740 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    Surv.48, 62(2016)

    Mittal, S.Asurveyoftechniquesforapproximatecomputing.ACM Comput. Surv.48, 62(2016). 8

    2016

  8. [8]

    Green, M. A. Helium refrigeration during the 50 years since the 1968 Brookhaven summer study. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.29, 0603505 (2019)

    1968

  9. [9]

    & DiVincenzo, D

    Loss, D. & DiVincenzo, D. P. Quantum computation with quantum dots.Phys. Rev. A57, 120–126 (1998)

    1998

  10. [10]

    W., Franke, D

    Hendrickx, N. W., Franke, D. P., Sammak, A., Scappucci, G. & Veldhorst, M. Fast two-qubit logic with holes in germanium.Nature577, 487–491 (2020)

    2020

  11. [11]

    W., Massai, L., Mergenthaler, M.et al.Sweet-spot operation of a germanium hole spin qubit with highly anisotropic noise sensitivity.Nat

    Hendrickx, N. W., Massai, L., Mergenthaler, M.et al.Sweet-spot operation of a germanium hole spin qubit with highly anisotropic noise sensitivity.Nat. Mater.23, 920–927 (2024)

    2024

  12. [12]

    Wang, C.-A.et al.Operating semiconductor quantum processors with hopping spins.Science 385, 447–452 (2024)

    2024

  13. [13]

    L.et al.Coherent spin qubit shuttling through germanium quantum dots.Nat

    van Riggelen-Doelman, F., Wang, C.-A., de Snoo, S. L.et al.Coherent spin qubit shuttling through germanium quantum dots.Nat. Commun.15, 5716 (2024)

    2024

  14. [14]

    J.et al.High-fidelity single-spin shuttling in silicon.Nat

    De Smet, M., Matsumoto, Y., Zwerver, A.-M. J.et al.High-fidelity single-spin shuttling in silicon.Nat. Nanotechnol.20, 866–872 (2025)

    2025

  15. [15]

    D., Pan, A., Nichol, J

    Burkard, G., Ladd, T. D., Pan, A., Nichol, J. M. & Petta, J. R. Semiconductor spin qubits. Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 025003 (2023)

    2023

  16. [16]

    & Yoshikawa, N

    Takeuchi, N., Yamanashi, Y. & Yoshikawa, N. Reversibility and energy dissipation in adiabatic superconductor logic.Sci. Rep.7, 75 (2017)

    2017

  17. [17]

    Lawrie, W. I. L.et al.Spin relaxation benchmarks and individual qubit addressability for holes in quantum dots.Nano Lett.20, 7237–7242 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    C., Geyer, S., Fuhrer, A., Warburton, R

    Camenzind, L. C., Geyer, S., Fuhrer, A., Warburton, R. J., Zumbühl, D. M. & Kuhlmann, A. V. A hole spin qubit in a fin field-effect transistor above 4 kelvin.Nat. Electron.5, 178–183 (2022)

    2022

  19. [19]

    Petit, L.et al.Universal quantum logic in hot silicon qubits.Nature580, 355–359 (2020)

    2020

  20. [20]

    H.et al.Operation of a silicon quantum processor unit cell above one kelvin.Nature 580, 350–354 (2020)

    Yang, C. H.et al.Operation of a silicon quantum processor unit cell above one kelvin.Nature 580, 350–354 (2020)

    2020

  21. [21]

    K., Undseth, B., Raymenants, E.et al.Baseband control of single-electron silicon spin qubits in two dimensions.Nat

    Unseld, F. K., Undseth, B., Raymenants, E.et al.Baseband control of single-electron silicon spin qubits in two dimensions.Nat. Commun.16, 5605 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    Gullans, M. J. & Petta, J. R. Protocol for a resonantly driven three-qubit Toffoli gate with silicon spin qubits.Phys. Rev. B100, 085419 (2019)

    2019

  23. [23]

    W., Lawrie, W

    Hendrickx, N. W., Lawrie, W. I. L., Russ, M.et al.A four-qubit germanium quantum processor. Nature591, 580–585 (2021)

    2021

  24. [24]

    Takeda, K., Noiri, A., Nakajima, T., Kobayashi, T.et al.Quantum error correction with silicon spin qubits.Nature608, 682–686 (2022)

    2022

  25. [25]

    S.et al.Coupled vertical double quantum dots at single-hole occupancy in a strained Ge double well.Appl

    Ivlev, A. S.et al.Coupled vertical double quantum dots at single-hole occupancy in a strained Ge double well.Appl. Phys. Lett.125, 023501 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    J., Zhang, X.et al.Simultaneous operation of an 18-qubit modular array in germa- nium.arXiv:2604.01063 (2026)

    Dijkema, J. J., Zhang, X.et al.Simultaneous operation of an 18-qubit modular array in germa- nium.arXiv:2604.01063 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    & Loss, D

    Hetenyi, B., Kloeffel, C. & Loss, D. Exchange interaction of hole-spin qubits in double quantum dots in highly anisotropic semiconductors.Phys. Rev. Research2, 033036 (2020). 9

    2020

  28. [28]

    & Loss, D

    Bosco, S., Benito, M., Adelsberger, C. & Loss, D. Squeezed hole spin qubits in Ge quantum dots with ultrafast gates at low power.Phys. Rev. B104, 115425 (2021)

    2021

  29. [29]

    Geyer, S., Hetenyi, B., Bosco, S.et al.Anisotropic exchange interaction of two hole-spin qubits. Nat. Phys.20, 1152–1157 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    Commun.16, 3862 (2025)

    Saez-Mollejo, J.et al.Exchange anisotropies in microwave-driven singlet-triplet qubits.Nat. Commun.16, 3862 (2025)

    2025

  31. [31]

    & Loss, D

    Sarkar, A. & Loss, D. Micromagnet-free operation of electron spin qubits in Si/Si1−xGex vertical double quantum dots.arXiv:2512.19785 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Nielsen, M. A. & Chuang, I. L.Quantum Computation and Quantum Information(Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000)

    2000

  33. [33]

    Xue, X.et al.SpinBus: a scalable spin-qubit architecture with electron shuttling.Nat. Commun. 15, 4872 (2024)

    2024

  34. [34]

    Vigneau, F.et al.Probing quantum devices with radio-frequency reflectometry.Appl. Phys. Rev. 10, 021305 (2023)

    2023

  35. [35]

    Commun.10, 2776 (2019)

    Crippa, A.et al.Gate-reflectometry dispersive readout and coherent control of a spin qubit in silicon.Nat. Commun.10, 2776 (2019)

    2019

  36. [36]

    Nanotechnol.14, 437–441 (2019)

    West, A.et al.Gate-based single-shot readout of spins in silicon.Nat. Nanotechnol.14, 437–441 (2019)

    2019

  37. [37]

    Pakkiam, P.et al.Single-shot single-gate rf spin readout in silicon.Phys. Rev. X8, 041032 (2018)

    2018

  38. [38]

    R.et al.Single-shot readout of multiple donor electron spins with a gate-based sensor

    Hogg, M. R.et al.Single-shot readout of multiple donor electron spins with a gate-based sensor. PRX Quantum4, 010319 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    G., Tokura, Y

    Ono, K., Austing, D. G., Tokura, Y. & Tarucha, S. Current rectification by Pauli exclusion in a weakly coupled double quantum dot system.Science297, 1313–1317 (2002)

    2002

  40. [40]

    R.et al.Coherent manipulation of coupled electron spins in semiconductor quantum dots.Science309, 2180–2184 (2005)

    Petta, J. R.et al.Coherent manipulation of coupled electron spins in semiconductor quantum dots.Science309, 2180–2184 (2005)

    2005

  41. [41]

    & Loss, D

    Maier, F., Kloeffel, C. & Loss, D. Tunablegfactor and phonon-mediated hole spin relaxation in Ge/Si nanowire quantum dots.Phys. Rev. B87, 161305(R) (2013)

    2013

  42. [42]

    R., Cullen, J

    Wang, Z., Marcellina, E., Hamilton, A. R., Cullen, J. H., Rogge, S., Salfi, J. & Culcer, D. Optimal operation points for ultrafast, highly coherent Ge hole spin-orbit qubits.npj Quantum Inf.7, 54 (2021)

    2021

  43. [43]

    & Loss, D

    Bosco, S., Hetényi, B. & Loss, D. Hole spin qubits in Si FinFETs with fully tunable spin-orbit coupling and sweet spots for charge noise.PRX Quantum2, 010348 (2021)

    2021

  44. [44]

    A., Loss, D., Myronov, M., Zhang, J.-J., De Franceschi, S., Katsaros, G

    Scappucci, G., Kloeffel, C., Zwanenburg, F. A., Loss, D., Myronov, M., Zhang, J.-J., De Franceschi, S., Katsaros, G. & Veldhorst, M. The germanium quantum information route. Nat. Rev. Mater.6, 926–943 (2021)

    2021

  45. [45]

    & Loss, D

    Stano, P. & Loss, D. Review of performance metrics of spin qubits in gated semiconducting nanostructures.Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 672–688 (2022)

    2022

  46. [46]

    Fang, Y., Philippopoulos, P., Culcer, D., Coish, W. A. & Chesi, S. Recent advances in hole-spin qubits.Mater. Quantum Technol.3, 012003 (2023). 10

    2023

  47. [47]

    Zwerver, A. M. J.et al.Qubits made by advanced semiconductor manufacturing.Nat. Electron. 5, 184–190 (2022)

    2022

  48. [48]

    Commun.7, 13575 (2016)

    Maurand, R.et al.A CMOS silicon spin qubit.Nat. Commun.7, 13575 (2016)

    2016

  49. [49]

    A digitally controlled silicon quantum processing unit

    Members of the HRL Quantum Team and Collaborators. A digitally controlled silicon quantum processing unit. Preprint at arXiv:2604.16216 (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  50. [50]

    T.et al.Operating two exchange-only qubits in parallel.Nature647, 870–875 (2025)

    Mądzik, M. T.et al.Operating two exchange-only qubits in parallel.Nature647, 870–875 (2025)

    2025

  51. [51]

    Classical Reversible Computation by Quantum Coherence

    Loss, D.Reproducibility package for “Classical Reversible Computation by Quantum Coherence”, version v1.0, Zenodo (2026). DOI to be assigned upon publication. 11

    2026

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 2, 2026.