Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Coherent control techniques for two-state quantum systems: A comparative study

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2012.15120 v2 pith:6D2PFKCH submitted 2020-12-30 quant-ph

classification quant-ph
keywords coherentcompositeerrorspulsestechniquesadiabaticbroadeningcontrol
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We evaluate various sources of errors that occur when attempting to produce a specified coherent change of a two-state quantum system using six popular coherent control techniques: resonant excitation, adiabatic following, composite adiabatic passage, universal composite pulses, shortcut to adiabaticity, and single-shot shaped pulses. As error sources we consider spatial intensity distribution, transit time variation, inhomogeneous broadening, Doppler broadening, unwanted chirp and shape errors. For the various error types different techniques emerge as the best performers but overall, we find that universal composite pulses perform most consistently and are most resilient to errors compared to all other procedures.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools