Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Readout sweet spots for spin qubits with strong spin-orbit interaction

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Spin-qubit readout leakage vanishes at a universal field direction.

desk verdict Clean single-dot readout sweet spot, but the universality claim stumbles on the reference spin's g-tensor modulation. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.15878 v1 pith:6TMO5RQA submitted 2025-05-21 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall

Domonkos Svastits , Bence Hetényi , Gábor Széchenyi , James Wootton , Daniel Loss , Stefano Bosco , András Pályi This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.mes-hall
keywords spinqubitschargesensingreadoutquantumpointcontactspin-orbitinteractiong-tensormodulationmeasurementback-actionleakagesweetspot
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper models charge-sensing readout of spin qubits in double quantum dots and separates the readout problem into three error channels: residual tunnel coupling between the dots, charge noise of the sensor, and g-tensor modulation caused by the fluctuating electric field of the charge-sensing point contact. The central result is a configuration called a readout sweet spot: for devices with strong spin-orbit interaction and electrically tunable g-tensors, choosing the magnetic-field direction so that the static Zeeman field on the measured dot is parallel to the Zeeman-field fluctuation produced by the sensor eliminates readout-induced leakage and keeps the post-measurement state pure. The paper proves such a direction always exists, because it is a real eigenvector of the matrix $g^{-1}g'$, and argues the recipe is universal, insensitive to the microscopic details of spin-orbit interaction. If true, this turns a nuisance (sensor back-action) into a tunable resource for high-fidelity mid-circuit measurement.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the $3\times3$ matrix $g^{-1}g'$, built from the dot's $g$-tensor $g$ (static Zeeman response) and the sensor-induced $g$-tensor modulation $g'$. Its real right eigenvectors are exactly the magnetic-field directions satisfying $gB \parallel g'B$, the readout sweet spot; because a real matrix has either one or three real eigenvalue–eigenvector pairs, at least one physical field direction always exists. The argument runs through a 'qubit measures qubit' (QMQ) model in which the quantum point contact is represented by a single two-level meter, so the entire readout is a sequence of weak indirect measurements; the measurement operations for the final inferred outcome are then computed exactly, and the sweet-spot condition follows from demanding that the interaction Hamiltonian commute with the spin Hamiltonian in the computational subspace.

What would settle it

Scan the external magnetic-field direction for a single spin qubit with known $g$ and separately characterized $g'$, measure readout infidelity, post-measurement purity, and leakage rate at fixed integration time, and check that all three are simultaneously optimized at a direction satisfying $gB \parallel g'B$; finding a well-isolated better direction outside the predicted eigenvector set would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim is that a spin-qubit readout can be made effectively projective by satisfying two conditions at once: switch off the inter-dot tunnel coupling during charge sensing, and orient the external magnetic field along a direction where the static Zeeman field in the measured dot is parallel to the local Zeeman-field fluctuation caused by the charge sensor. In that geometry the sensor still sees the qubit state through the charge configuration, but the g-tensor-modulation term commutes with the spin Hamiltonian, so no incoherent transitions are activated between the computational state and the leaked state. The commutation is captured by the vector equation $gB \parallel g'B$, and the paper shows this equation always has a physical solution: the matrix $g^{-1}g'$ has at least one real eigenvalue with a real eigenvector, which supplies the required field direction. When the direction is chosen instead with a perpendicular modulation component $\Delta_x$, leakage appears with rate $\Gamma_{\rm leak} = 2\Delta_x^2\delta\gamma^2 \sin^2(Z_R\Delta\tau/\hbar)/(Z_R^2\Delta\tau)$, saturating at leakage probability $1/2$ for long integration times.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the quantum point contact current is sensed perfectly, with no measurement inefficiency or added noise; if real amplifiers and detectors are slower or noisier, the measurement rate drops relative to the relaxation and leakage rates, and the fidelity gain at the sweet spot may be smaller than the model predicts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With the tunnel coupling switched off and the field at the sweet spot, readout infidelity tends to zero as the integration time grows, and the post-measurement state stays pure.
  • When the field is misaligned, leakage appears at a rate proportional to the square of the perpendicular modulation component $\Delta_x$, so orienting the field to satisfy $gB \parallel g'B$ suppresses that error channel entirely.
  • The parallel component $\Delta_z$ increases the measurement rate, so among the (at most three) sweet-spot directions the one with the largest eigenvalue of $g^{-1}g'$ is optimal.
  • In multi-qubit devices, the $g$-tensor parameters can be tuned by gate voltages, so the sweet-spot directions of different qubits can in principle be synchronized.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If current sensing is inefficient or noisy rather than perfect, the measurement rate would fall while the dephasing and relaxation rates stay fixed, so the fidelity advantage at the sweet spot would shrink; the paper flags this assumption in its supplementary material but does not quantify the degradation.
  • The same $gB \parallel g'B$ criterion should apply to any charge-sensing technique whose fluctuating electric field modulates the $g$-tensor, not only a quantum point contact, because the geometry of the commutation condition is independent of the sensor's microscopic implementation.
  • A direct experimental test would be to fix a strong-spin-orbit qubit, measure $g$ and $g'$ independently, then sweep the field direction and check that the minimum of readout-induced leakage and the maximum of post-measurement purity occur at the predicted eigenvector direction.
  • The sweet-spot field direction could be found without knowing $g'$ in advance by measuring leakage as a function of field orientation and looking for the zero; that measured direction would then give an indirect characterization of $g^{-1}g'$.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a 'qubit measures qubit' (QMQ) model of QPC-based charge-sensing readout for charge qubits and single-spin qubits in double quantum dots, and uses it to quantify readout errors beyond simple infidelity. It identifies two back-action mechanisms: residual tunnel coupling during readout, which causes measurement-induced relaxation and mixed post-measurement states, and g-tensor modulation by the fluctuating QPC field, which causes leakage from the computational subspace in spin-orbit-coupled devices. For the spin-qubit case, the paper derives analytical rates for measurement, relaxation, and leakage, and shows that leakage is eliminated when the static Zeeman field in the measured dot is parallel to the QPC-induced Zeeman-field fluctuation. It argues that such a direction always exists as a real eigenvector of g^{-1}g', identifies a 'readout sweet spot' for the magnetic-field orientation, and proposes an experimental protocol to measure leakage.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the readout sweet spot is a simple, parameter-free design rule for spin qubits with strong spin-orbit interaction, and the QMQ framework provides a useful way to evaluate post-measurement purity and leakage alongside fidelity. The paper's strengths include the analytically derived rates that are checked against numerical QMQ simulations (Eqs. 3, 4, and 10), the rigorous eigenvector argument for the existence of the sweet-spot field direction, and a concrete leakage-detection protocol. The main risk to the universality claim is the model's restriction of g-tensor modulation to the measured dot only, since the readout protocol is inherently a two-dot procedure with a reference spin.

major comments (2)
  1. [Spin qubit, Eq. (8)] The interaction Hamiltonian in Eq. (8) contains only the right-dot g-tensor modulation term s_R·Δ. Because the readout uses a two-electron DQD and the introduction states that the QPC field modulates the g-tensors of the spins in the DQD, the model should either include a left-dot term s_L·Δ_L or explicitly justify its absence. Without such a term, leakage from |↓↓⟩ to |↑↓⟩ due to left-spin flips is not addressed, and the proof that g_R^{-1}g'_R has a real eigenvector does not imply the existence of a field direction that simultaneously satisfies g_L B ∥ g'_L B for two unrelated 3x3 matrices. The universality claim therefore currently exceeds the model; please add a quantitative justification (e.g., field localization, parameter estimates) or explicitly limit the claim to the measured dot.
  2. [SM S4, Eq. (S45)] The leakage rate is written as 2 Δ_x² δγ²/(Z_R² Δτ) sin²(Z_R Δτ/ℏ), which contains an extra factor δγ² relative to the main-text Eq. (10) and has dimensions of energy²/time rather than 1/time. The two equations are mutually inconsistent, and the supplementary version would not match the numerical data in Fig. 3f if used as written. Please correct this formula and state explicitly which expression is used in the inset comparison.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 3 and main text] The sentence 'The red arrow in Figs. 3c,d show the readout sweet spot' appears to refer to the panels that actually display the sweet-spot orientation; please check the figure panel numbering and correct the caption references.
  2. [Spin qubit section] The components Δ_x and Δ_z are first used in Fig. 3 without being defined in the main text; please define them explicitly as components of Δ = μ_B g'_R B/2 before their first use.
  3. [SM S2] The statement that current sensing is assumed to be perfect is an important limitation for the quantitative fidelity comparison between measurement and leakage rates; a sentence in the main text discussing the expected impact of inefficient sensing would help readers.
  4. [Abstract] The abstract lists 'charge noise of the sensor' as a modeled error mechanism, but the QMQ model does not include classical charge noise; please either add a brief explanation of how charge noise enters the model or reword the abstract to match the model content.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the readout sweet-spot condition is derived from the model Hamiltonian and elementary linear algebra, not fitted, renamed, or imported from a load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The central claim is a derived condition, not a fitted input or a renamed known result. The paper models the QPC back-action on the right-dot spin via Eq. (8), H^s_int = -(δγ |S(0,2)><S(0,2)| + s_R · Δ) ⊗ τ_x with Δ = μ_B g'_R B/2, and shows that leakage from |↓↓> is controlled by whether the QPC-induced Zeeman fluctuation commutes with the static Zeeman Hamiltonian. The vanishing of the commutator for Δ parallel to the static field, and the leakage rate Γ_leak in Eq. (10), are derived by perturbation theory in SM S4 and then checked numerically; the numerical fits of Γ_m in the insets are consistency checks against analytical formulas, not parameters fed into the prediction. The 'always exists' statement, gB ∥ g'B solved by real eigenvectors of g^{-1}g', is elementary linear algebra: a real 3×3 matrix has at least one real eigenvector. Although Ref. [75] is a same-group prior work, the paper does not rely on it as an unverified uniqueness theorem; the algebraic fact is self-contained and also standard. The perfect-current-sensing assumption and the omission of a left-dot g'_L term are model-scope and correctness limitations rather than circular reductions: no equation in the paper is equivalent to its own input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Therefore no specific circular step can be exhibited, and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small number of domain assumptions: the QMQ representation of the QPC, the two-site Hubbard model, and the phenomenological spin-charge coupling in Eq. (8). No new physical entities are introduced; the meter qubit is a computational representation. The parameters listed are experimental inputs or modeling choices, not fitted to the central result. The sweet-spot condition itself is parameter-free once g and g' are given.

free parameters (4)
  • Delta_tau (meter timestep) = pi*hbar/(4(gamma-delta_gamma/2)) (Eq. S12)
    Set to place the QPC at the half-transmission working point; an ad hoc but experimentally motivated choice, not fitted to the central result.
  • gamma (meter tunnel amplitude) = 5 micro-eV (SM S2)
    Experimental input matching about 1 nA QPC current.
  • delta_gamma (qubit-meter Coulomb coupling) = 0.5 micro-eV (SM S2)
    Experimental input matching about 100 pA current difference between left and right dot.
  • g' (g-tensor modulation matrix) = from ref 70 (Crippa et al.)
    Input from cited experiment; the sweet-spot condition holds for any g and g'.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard indirect-measurement formalism with measurement operations (Wiseman-Milburn)
    Basis for Eqs. (2), (5), (9) defining infidelity, mixedness, and leakage.
  • domain assumption Two-site Hubbard model with one orbital per dot and two-electron spin states
    Eq. (6) for the spin qubit; neglects orbital excited states and valley degrees of freedom.
  • domain assumption QPC can be modeled as a single two-level system (QMQ model)
    Central modeling assumption in the Model section; the meter qubit replaces the continuum of QPC channels.
  • domain assumption Spin-charge coupling has the form of Eq. (8): -(delta_gamma*|S(0,2)><S(0,2)| + s_R dot Delta) tensor tau_x
    Phenomenological g-tensor modulation; the sweet-spot result follows from its commutation with H_spin.
  • standard math A 3x3 real matrix always has at least one real eigenvalue/eigenvector
    Used to argue that a readout sweet spot exists for any generic g and g'.
  • standard math First-order time-dependent perturbation theory for transfer matrices
    Used in SM S4 to derive Eqs. (4) and (10); assumes small delta_gamma and t.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Readout sweet spots for spin qubits with strong spin-orbit interaction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6TMO5RQA

@misc{pith2026250515878,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Readout sweet spots for spin qubits with strong spin-orbit interaction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6TMO5RQA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.15878}
}
abstract

Qubit readout schemes often deviate from ideal projective measurements, introducing critical issues that limit quantum computing performance. In this work, we model charge-sensing-based readout for semiconductor spin qubits in double quantum dots, and identify key error mechanisms caused by the back-action of the charge sensor. We quantify how the charge noise of the sensor, residual tunneling, and $g$-tensor modulation degrade readout fidelity, induce a mixed post-measurement state, and cause leakage from the computational subspace. For state-of-the-art systems with strong spin-orbit interaction and electrically tunable $g$-tensors, we identify a readout sweet spot, that is, a special device configuration where readout is closest to projective. Our framework provides a foundation for developing effective readout error mitigation strategies, with broad applications for optimizing readout performance for a variety of charge-sensing techniques, advancing quantum protocols, and improving adaptive circuits for error correction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.15878 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Charge-sensing-based readout of a charge qubit. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Measurement benchmarks for charge qubit read [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Spin-qubit readout error due to g-tensor modulation by the charge sensor. (a) Readout setup in a double quantum dot: Spin in the right dot is to be read out utilizing the reference spin in left dot, with the combination of Pauli spin blockade and charge sensing. (b), (c) Readout sweet spot, shown by red arrow: magnetic field direction providing optimized readout (∆x = 0), for g-tensor parameters from70. Colors show … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Personalized Improvement of Standard Readout Error Mitigation using Low-Depth Circuits and Machine Learning

    quant-ph 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A proposed machine-learning update to quantum readout error matrices claims 6.6-29.9% metric improvements in simulation, but its least-squares core is degenerate because each qubit's probability vector sums to one.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Loss \ and\ author D

    author author D. Loss \ and\ author D. P. \ DiVincenzo ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.57.120 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 57 ,\ pages 120 ( year 1998 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/physreva.57.120 1998

  2. [2]

    Hanson , author L

    author author R. Hanson , author L. P. \ Kouwenhoven , author J. R. \ Petta , author S. Tarucha ,\ and\ author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.79.1217 journal journal Rev. Mod. Phys. \ volume 79 ,\ pages 1217 ( year 2007 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.79.1217

  3. [3]

    author author F. A. \ Zwanenburg , author A. S. \ Dzurak , author A. Morello , author M. Y. \ Simmons , author L. C. L. \ Hollenberg , author G. Klimeck , author S. Rogge , author S. N. \ Coppersmith ,\ and\ author M. A. \ Eriksson ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.85.961 journal journal Rev. Mod. Phys. \ volume 85 ,\ pages 961 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.85.961

  4. [4]

    Eriksson , author M

    author author M. Eriksson , author M. Friesen , author S. Coppersmith , author R. Joynt , author L. Klein , author K. Slinker , author C. Tahan , author P. Mooney , author J. Chu ,\ and\ author S. Koester ,\ https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-004-2224-z journal journal Quantum Information Processing \ volume 3 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-004-2224-z

  5. [5]

    Burkard , author T

    author author G. Burkard , author T. D. \ Ladd , author A. Pan , author J. M. \ Nichol ,\ and\ author J. R. \ Petta ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.95.025003 journal journal Rev. Mod. Phys. \ volume 95 ,\ pages 025003 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.95.025003

  6. [6]

    \ Wang , author V

    author author C.-A. \ Wang , author V. John , author H. Tidjani , author C. X. \ Yu , author A. S. \ Ivlev , author C. Déprez , author F. van Riggelen-Doelman , author B. D. \ Woods , author N. W. \ Hendrickx , author W. I. L. \ Lawrie , author L. E. A. \ Stehouwer , author S. D. \ Oosterhout , author A. Sammak , author M. Friesen , author G. Scappucci , ...

    doi:10.1126/science.ado5915

  7. [7]

    Zhang , author E

    author author X. Zhang , author E. Morozova , author M. Rimbach-Russ , author D. Jirovec , author T.-K. \ Hsiao , author P. C. \ Fariña , author C.-A. \ Wang , author S. D. \ Oosterhout , author A. Sammak , author G. Scappucci , author M. Veldhorst ,\ and\ author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-024-01817-9 journal journal Nature N...

    doi:10.1038/s41565-024-01817-9

  8. [8]

    author author S. G. J. \ Philips , author M. T. \ Mądzik , author S. V. \ Amitonov , author S. L. \ de Snoo , author M. Russ , author N. Kalhor , author C. Volk , author W. I. L. \ Lawrie , author D. Brousse , author L. Tryputen , author B. P. \ Wuetz , author A. Sammak , author M. Veldhorst , author G. Scappucci ,\ and\ author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen ,\ h...

    doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05117-x

Show all 89 references
  1. [9]

    author author N. W. \ Hendrickx , author W. I. L. \ Lawrie , author M. Russ , author F. van Riggelen , author S. L. \ de Snoo , author R. N. \ Schouten , author A. Sammak , author G. Scappucci ,\ and\ author M. Veldhorst ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03332-6 journal jo...

    doi

  2. [10]

    Kloeffel \ and\ author D

    author author C. Kloeffel \ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-030212-184248 journal journal Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics \ volume 4 ,\ pages 51 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013 doi

  3. [11]

    author author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen , author H. Bluhm , author J. S. \ Clarke , author A. S. \ Dzurak , author R. Ishihara , author A. Morello , author D. J. \ Reilly , author L. R. \ Schreiber ,\ and\ author M. Veldhorst ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-017-0038-y journal j...

    doi

  4. [12]

    Scappucci , author C

    author author G. Scappucci , author C. Kloeffel , author F. A. \ Zwanenburg , author D. Loss , author M. Myronov , author J.-J. \ Zhang , author S. D. \ Franceschi , author G. Katsaros ,\ and\ author M. Veldhorst ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-020-00262-z journal journal Na...

    doi

  5. [13]

    Stano \ and\ author D

    author author P. Stano \ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-022-00484-w journal journal Nature Reviews Physics \ volume 4 ,\ pages 672 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    Maurand , author X

    author author R. Maurand , author X. Jehl , author D. Kotekar-Patil , author A. Corna , author H. Bohuslavskyi , author R. Laviéville , author L. Hutin , author S. Barraud , author M. Vinet , author M. Sanquer ,\ and\ author S. De Franceschi ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13...

    doi

  7. [15]

    Xue , author B

    author author X. Xue , author B. Patra , author J. P. G. \ van Dijk , author N. Samkharadze , author S. Subramanian , author A. Corna , author B. Paquelet Wuetz , author C. Jeon , author F. Sheikh , author E. Juarez-Hernandez , author B. P. \ Esparza , author H. Rampurawala , ...

  8. [16]

    Jirovec , author A

    author author D. Jirovec , author A. Hofmann , author A. Ballabio , author P. M. \ Mutter , author G. Tavani , author M. Botifoll , author A. Crippa , author J. Kukucka , author O. Sagi , author F. Martins , author J. Saez-Mollejo , author I. Prieto , author M. Borovkov , auth...

    doi

  9. [17]

    author author S. D. \ Liles , author D. J. \ Halverson , author Z. Wang , author A. Shamim , author R. S. \ Eggli , author I. K. \ Jin , author J. Hillier , author K. Kumar , author I. Vorreiter , author M. J. \ Rendell , author J. Y. \ Huang , author C. C. \ Escott , author F...

    doi

  10. [18]

    author author L. C. \ Camenzind , author S. Geyer , author A. Fuhrer , author R. J. \ Warburton , author D. M. \ Zumbühl ,\ and\ author A. V. \ Kuhlmann ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41928-022-00722-0 journal journal Nature Electronics \ volume 5 ,\ pages 178 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi

  11. [19]

    author author A. M. J. \ Zwerver , author T. Krähenmann , author T. F. \ Watson , author L. Lampert , author H. C. \ George , author R. Pillarisetty , author S. A. \ Bojarski , author P. Amin , author S. V. \ Amitonov , author J. M. \ Boter , author R. Caudillo , author D. Cor...

  12. [20]

    Neyens , author O

    author author S. Neyens , author O. K. \ Zietz , author T. F. \ Watson , author F. Luthi , author A. Nethwewala , author H. C. \ George , author E. Henry , author M. Islam , author A. J. \ Wagner , author F. Borjans , author E. J. \ Connors , author J. Corrigan , author M. J. ...

  13. [21]

    Geyer , author B

    author author S. Geyer , author B. Hetényi , author S. Bosco , author L. C. \ Camenzind , author R. S. \ Eggli , author A. Fuhrer , author D. Loss , author R. J. \ Warburton , author D. M. \ Zumbühl ,\ and\ author A. V. \ Kuhlmann ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-024-02481-5 ...

    doi

  14. [22]

    Steinacker , author N

    author author P. Steinacker , author N. D. \ Stuyck , author W. H. \ Lim , author T. Tanttu , author M. Feng , author A. Nickl , author S. Serrano , author M. Candido , author J. D. \ Cifuentes , author F. E. \ Hudson , author K. W. \ Chan , author S. Kubicek , author J. Jusso...

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Xue , author M

    author author X. Xue , author M. Russ , author N. Samkharadze , author B. Undseth , author A. Sammak , author G. Scappucci ,\ and\ author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04273-w journal journal Nature \ volume 601 ,\ pages 343 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi

  16. [24]

    Noiri , author K

    author author A. Noiri , author K. Takeda , author T. Nakajima , author T. Kobayashi , author A. Sammak , author G. Scappucci ,\ and\ author S. Tarucha ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04182-y journal journal Nature \ volume 601 ,\ pages 338 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi

  17. [25]

    author author A. R. \ Mills , author C. R. \ Guinn , author M. J. \ Gullans , author A. J. \ Sigillito , author M. M. \ Feldman , author E. Nielsen ,\ and\ author J. R. \ Petta ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn5130 journal journal Science Advances \ volume 8 ,\ pages eabn5...

    doi

  18. [26]

    Takeda , author A

    author author K. Takeda , author A. Noiri , author T. Nakajima , author L. C. \ Camenzind , author T. Kobayashi , author A. Sammak , author G. Scappucci ,\ and\ author S. Tarucha ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-024-00813-0 journal journal npj Quantum Information \ volume 10 ...

    doi

  19. [27]

    Harvey-Collard , author B

    author author P. Harvey-Collard , author B. D'Anjou , author M. Rudolph , author N. T. \ Jacobson , author J. Dominguez , author G. A. \ Ten Eyck , author J. R. \ Wendt , author T. Pluym , author M. P. \ Lilly , author W. A. \ Coish , author M. Pioro-Ladri\`ere ,\ and\ author ...

    doi

  20. [28]

    author author J. Z. \ Blumoff , author A. S. \ Pan , author T. E. \ Keating , author R. W. \ Andrews , author D. W. \ Barnes , author T. L. \ Brecht , author E. T. \ Croke , author L. E. \ Euliss , author J. A. \ Fast , author C. A. \ Jackson , author A. M. \ Jones , author J....

  21. [29]

    Nurizzo , author B

    author author M. Nurizzo , author B. Jadot , author P.-A. \ Mortemousque , author V. Thiney , author E. Chanrion , author D. Niegemann , author M. Dartiailh , author A. Ludwig , author A. D. \ Wieck , author C. B\"auerle , author M. Urdampilleta ,\ and\ author T. Meunier ,\ ht...

    doi

  22. [30]

    Vigneau , author F

    author author F. Vigneau , author F. Fedele , author A. Chatterjee , author D. Reilly , author F. Kuemmeth , author M. F. \ Gonzalez-Zalba , author E. Laird ,\ and\ author N. Ares ,\ https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0088229 journal journal Applied Physics Reviews \ volume 10 ,\ pages...

    doi

  23. [31]

    Pereira , author J

    author author L. Pereira , author J. J. \ Garc\' a-Ripoll ,\ and\ author T. Ramos ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.010402 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 129 ,\ pages 010402 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022 doi

  24. [32]

    Pereira , author J

    author author L. Pereira , author J. J. \ García-Ripoll ,\ and\ author T. Ramos ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-023-00688-7 journal journal npj Quantum Information \ volume 9 ,\ pages 22 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    Rudinger , author G

    author author K. Rudinger , author G. J. \ Ribeill , author L. C. \ Govia , author M. Ware , author E. Nielsen , author K. Young , author T. A. \ Ohki , author R. Blume-Kohout ,\ and\ author T. Proctor ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.17.014014 journal journal Phys. R...

    doi

  26. [34]

    Zhang , author S

    author author Z. Zhang , author S. Chen , author Y. Liu ,\ and\ author L. Jiang ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.6.010310 journal journal PRX Quantum \ volume 6 ,\ pages 010310 ( year 2025 b ) NoStop

    2025 doi

  27. [35]

    Hines \ and\ author T

    author author J. Hines \ and\ author T. Proctor ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.020602 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 134 ,\ pages 020602 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    2025 doi

  28. [36]

    Hothem , author J

    author author D. Hothem , author J. Hines , author C. Baldwin , author D. Gresh , author R. Blume-Kohout ,\ and\ author T. Proctor ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16706 title Measuring error rates of mid-circuit measurements ( year 2024 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16706 arXiv...

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    McLaren , author M

    author author D. McLaren , author M. A. \ Graydon , author A. A. \ Mahmoud ,\ and\ author J. J. \ Wallman ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.00179 title Benchmarking quantum instruments ( year 2025 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.00179 arXiv:2502.00179 [quant-ph] NoStop

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    author author K. C. \ Miao , author M. McEwen , author J. Atalaya , author D. Kafri , author L. P. \ Pryadko , author A. Bengtsson , author A. Opremcak , author K. J. \ Satzinger , author Z. Chen , author P. V. \ Klimov , author C. Quintana , author R. Acharya , author K. Ande...

  31. [39]

    McEwen , author D

    author author M. McEwen , author D. Kafri , author Z. Chen , author J. Atalaya , author K. J. \ Satzinger , author C. Quintana , author P. V. \ Klimov , author D. Sank , author C. Gidney , author A. G. \ Fowler , author F. Arute , author K. Arya , author B. Buckley , author B....

  32. [40]

    Battistel , author B

    author author F. Battistel , author B. Varbanov ,\ and\ author B. Terhal ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.030314 journal journal PRX Quantum \ volume 2 ,\ pages 030314 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    author author J. F. \ Marques , author H. Ali , author B. M. \ Varbanov , author M. Finkel , author H. M. \ Veen , author S. L. M. \ van der Meer , author S. Valles-Sanclemente , author N. Muthusubramanian , author M. Beekman , author N. Haider , author B. M. \ Terhal ,\ and\ ...

    doi

  34. [42]

    Liepelt , author T

    author author M. Liepelt , author T. Peduzzi ,\ and\ author J. R. \ Wootton ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ad5085 journal journal Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical \ volume 57 ,\ pages 255302 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    doi

  35. [43]

    author author G. P. \ Gehér , author M. Jastrzebski , author E. T. \ Campbell ,\ and\ author O. Crawford ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.00758 title To reset, or not to reset -- that is the question ( year 2024 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.00758 arXiv:2408.00758 [quant-ph] NoStop

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Tornow , author N

    author author C. Tornow , author N. Kanazawa , author W. E. \ Shanks ,\ and\ author D. J. \ Egger ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.17.064061 journal journal Phys. Rev. Appl. \ volume 17 ,\ pages 064061 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    B\"aumer , author V

    author author E. B\"aumer , author V. Tripathi , author D. S. \ Wang , author P. Rall , author E. H. \ Chen , author S. Majumder , author A. Seif ,\ and\ author Z. K. \ Minev ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030339 journal journal PRX Quantum \ volume 5 ,\ pages 030339 ...

    doi

  38. [46]

    Fleury , author J

    author author A. Fleury , author J. Brown , author E. Lloyd , author M. Hernandez ,\ and\ author I. H. \ Kim ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.4c00837 journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 20 ,\ pages 10807–10816 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    doi

  39. [47]

    author author J. P. T. \ Stenger , author G. Bazargan , author N. T. \ Bronn ,\ and\ author D. Gunlycke ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.15187 title Method for simulating open-system dynamics using mid-circuit measurements on a quantum computer ( year 2025 ),\ https://arxiv.org/a...

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bäumer , author V

    author author E. Bäumer , author V. Tripathi , author A. Seif , author D. Lidar ,\ and\ author D. S. \ Wang ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09514 title Quantum fourier transform using dynamic circuits ( year 2024 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09514 arXiv:2403.09514 [quant-ph] NoStop

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Cao \ and\ author J

    author author C. Cao \ and\ author J. Eisert ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.04705 title Measurement-driven quantum advantages in shallow circuits ( year 2025 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.04705 arXiv:2505.04705 [quant-ph] NoStop

    2025

  42. [50]

    Ono , author D

    author author K. Ono , author D. G. \ Austing , author Y. Tokura ,\ and\ author S. Tarucha ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1070958 journal journal Science \ volume 297 ,\ pages 1313 ( year 2002 ) NoStop

    2002 doi

  43. [51]

    author author J. R. \ Petta , author A. C. \ Johnson , author J. M. \ Taylor , author E. A. \ Laird , author A. Yacoby , author M. D. \ Lukin , author C. M. \ Marcus , author M. P. \ Hanson ,\ and\ author A. C. \ Gossard ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116955 journal journ...

    doi

  44. [52]

    author author F. H. L. \ Koppens , author C. Buizert , author K. J. \ Tielrooij , author I. T. \ Vink , author K. C. \ Nowack , author T. Meunier , author L. P. \ Kouwenhoven ,\ and\ author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05065 journal journal Nature \ ...

    doi

  45. [53]

    Haldar , author M

    author author S. Haldar , author M. Munk , author H. Havir , author W. Khan , author S. Lehmann , author C. Thelander , author K. A. \ Dick , author P. Samuelsson , author P. P. \ Potts ,\ and\ author V. F. \ Maisi ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.023601 journal jour...

    doi

  46. [54]

    Taubert , author M

    author author D. Taubert , author M. Pioro-Ladri\`ere , author D. Schr\"oer , author D. Harbusch , author A. S. \ Sachrajda ,\ and\ author S. Ludwig ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.176805 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 100 ,\ pages 176805 ( year 2008 ) NoStop

    doi

  47. [55]

    author author M. S. \ Ferguson , author L. C. \ Camenzind , author C. Müller , author D. E. F. \ Biesinger , author C. P. \ Scheller , author B. Braunecker , author D. M. \ Zumbühl ,\ and\ author O. Zilberberg ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.04635 title Quantum measurement induc...

    2010 arXiv

  48. [56]

    author author C. E. \ Young \ and\ author A. A. \ Clerk ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.186803 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 104 ,\ pages 186803 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  49. [57]

    author author J. M. \ Elzerman , author R. Hanson , author J. S. \ Greidanus , author L. H. \ Willems van Beveren , author S. De Franceschi , author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen , author S. Tarucha ,\ and\ author L. P. \ Kouwenhoven ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.67.161308 jour...

    doi

  50. [58]

    author author J. M. \ Elzerman , author R. Hanson , author L. H. \ Willems van Beveren , author B. Witkamp , author L. M. K. \ Vandersypen ,\ and\ author L. P. \ Kouwenhoven ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 430 ,\ pages 431 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004

  51. [59]

    Gustavsson , author R

    author author S. Gustavsson , author R. Leturcq , author B. Simovi c c , author R. Schleser , author T. Ihn , author P. Studerus , author K. Ensslin , author D. C. \ Driscoll ,\ and\ author A. C. \ Gossard ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.076605 journal journal Phys. ...

    doi

  52. [60]

    author author H. M. \ Wiseman \ and\ author G. J. \ Milburn ,\ @noop title Quantum Measurement and Control \ ( publisher Cambridge University Press ,\ year 2009 ) NoStop

    2009

  53. [61]

    author author L. Diosi ,\ https://books.google.hu/books?id=LHAsAAAAYAAJ title A Short Course in Quantum Information Theory: An Approach From Theoretical Physics ,\ Lecture Notes in Physics\ ( publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg ,\ year 2007 ) NoStop

    2007

  54. [62]

    \ Goan , author G

    author author H.-S. \ Goan , author G. J. \ Milburn , author H. M. \ Wiseman ,\ and\ author H. Bi Sun ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.63.125326 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 63 ,\ pages 125326 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001 doi

  55. [63]

    \ Goan \ and\ author G

    author author H.-S. \ Goan \ and\ author G. J. \ Milburn ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.64.235307 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 64 ,\ pages 235307 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001 doi

  56. [64]

    author author K. D. \ Petersson , author J. R. \ Petta , author H. Lu ,\ and\ author A. C. \ Gossard ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.246804 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 105 ,\ pages 246804 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  57. [65]

    Scarlino , author J

    author author P. Scarlino , author J. H. \ Ungerer , author D. J. \ van Woerkom , author M. Mancini , author P. Stano , author C. M\"uller , author A. J. \ Landig , author J. V. \ Koski , author C. Reichl , author W. Wegscheider , author T. Ihn , author K. Ensslin ,\ and\ auth...

    doi

  58. [66]

    author author C. V. \ Meinersen , author S. Bosco ,\ and\ author M. Rimbach-Russ ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.03084 title Quantum geometric protocols for fast high-fidelity adiabatic state transfer ( year 2024 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.03084 arXiv:2409.03084 [quant-ph] NoStop

    2024

  59. [67]

    Hashim , author L

    author author A. Hashim , author L. B. \ Nguyen , author N. Goss , author B. Marinelli , author R. K. \ Naik , author T. Chistolini , author J. Hines , author J. P. \ Marceaux , author Y. Kim , author P. Gokhale , author T. Tomesh , author S. Chen , author L. Jiang , author S....

    2024

  60. [68]

    author author R. Pyke ,\ https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1965.tb00602.x journal journal Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) \ volume 27 ,\ pages 395 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    1965

  61. [69]

    Boissonneault , author J

    author author M. Boissonneault , author J. M. \ Gambetta ,\ and\ author A. Blais ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.79.013819 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 79 ,\ pages 013819 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    2009 doi

  62. [70]

    Crippa , author R

    author author A. Crippa , author R. Maurand , author L. Bourdet , author D. Kotekar-Patil , author A. Amisse , author X. Jehl , author M. Sanquer , author R. Lavi\'eville , author H. Bohuslavskyi , author L. Hutin , author S. Barraud , author M. Vinet , author Y.-M. \ Niquet ,...

    doi

  63. [71]

    Kato , author R

    author author Y. Kato , author R. C. \ Myers , author D. C. \ Driscoll , author A. C. \ Gossard , author J. Levy ,\ and\ author D. D. \ Awschalom ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1080880 journal journal Science \ volume 299 ,\ pages 1201 ( year 2003 ) NoStop

    doi

  64. [72]

    Borhani , author V

    author author M. Borhani , author V. N. \ Golovach ,\ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.73.155311 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 73 ,\ pages 155311 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006 doi

  65. [73]

    Venitucci , author L

    author author B. Venitucci , author L. Bourdet , author D. Pouzada ,\ and\ author Y.-M. \ Niquet ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.98.155319 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 98 ,\ pages 155319 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018 doi

  66. [74]

    Studenikin , author M

    author author S. Studenikin , author M. Korkusinski , author M. Takahashi , author J. Ducatel , author A. Padawer-Blatt , author A. Bogan , author D. G. \ Austing , author L. Gaudreau , author P. Zawadzki , author A. Sachrajda , author Y. Hirayama , author L. Tracy , author J....

    doi

  67. [75]

    Sen , author G

    author author A. Sen , author G. Frank , author B. Kolok , author J. Danon ,\ and\ author A. P\'alyi ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.108.245406 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 108 ,\ pages 245406 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    Piot , author B

    author author N. Piot , author B. Brun , author V. Schmitt , author S. Zihlmann , author V. P. \ Michal , author A. Apra , author J. C. \ Abadillo-Uriel , author X. Jehl , author B. Bertrand , author H. Niebojewski , author L. Hutin , author M. Vinet , author M. Urdampilleta ,...

    doi

  69. [77]

    author author V. P. \ Michal , author J. C. \ Abadillo-Uriel , author S. Zihlmann , author R. Maurand , author Y.-M. \ Niquet ,\ and\ author M. Filippone ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.107.L041303 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 107 ,\ pages L041303 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    doi

  70. [78]

    Mauro , author E

    author author L. Mauro , author E. A. \ Rodr\' guez-Mena , author M. Bassi , author V. Schmitt ,\ and\ author Y.-M. \ Niquet ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.109.155406 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 109 ,\ pages 155406 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    doi

  71. [79]

    Bosco \ and\ author D

    author author S. Bosco \ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.190501 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 127 ,\ pages 190501 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  72. [80]

    Bosco , author B

    author author S. Bosco , author B. Het\'enyi ,\ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.010348 journal journal PRX Quantum \ volume 2 ,\ pages 010348 ( year 2021 a ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  73. [81]

    Malkoc , author P

    author author O. Malkoc , author P. Stano ,\ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.247701 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 129 ,\ pages 247701 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022 doi

  74. [82]

    author author N. W. \ Hendrickx , author L. Massai , author M. Mergenthaler , author F. J. \ Schupp , author S. Paredes , author S. W. \ Bedell , author G. Salis ,\ and\ author A. Fuhrer ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-024-01857-5 journal journal Nature Materials \ volume 23...

    doi

  75. [83]

    John , author C

    author author V. John , author C. X. \ Yu , author B. van Straaten , author E. A. \ Rodríguez-Mena , author M. Rodríguez , author S. Oosterhout , author L. E. A. \ Stehouwer , author G. Scappucci , author S. Bosco , author M. Rimbach-Russ , author Y.-M. \ Niquet , author F. Bo...

    2025

  76. [84]

    Rimbach-Russ , author V

    author author M. Rimbach-Russ , author V. John , author B. van Straaten ,\ and\ author S. Bosco ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.13658 title A spinless spin qubit ( year 2024 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.13658 arXiv:2412.13658 [cond-mat.mes-hall] NoStop

    2024

  77. [85]

    Bosco , author P

    author author S. Bosco , author P. Scarlino , author J. Klinovaja ,\ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.066801 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 129 ,\ pages 066801 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    2022 doi

  78. [86]

    Bosco , author M

    author author S. Bosco , author M. Benito , author C. Adelsberger ,\ and\ author D. Loss ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.115425 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 104 ,\ pages 115425 ( year 2021 b ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  79. [87]

    Saez-Mollejo , author D

    author author J. Saez-Mollejo , author D. Jirovec , author Y. Schell , author J. Kukucka , author S. Calcaterra , author D. Chrastina , author G. Isella , author M. Rimbach-Russ , author S. Bosco ,\ and\ author G. Katsaros ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.03224 title Exchange ani...

    2024 arXiv

  80. [88]

    author author M. J. \ Carballido , author S. Svab , author R. S. \ Eggli , author T. Patlatiuk , author P. C. \ Kwon , author J. Schuff , author R. M. \ Kaiser , author L. C. \ Camenzind , author A. Li , author N. Ares , author E. P. A. M. \ Bakkers , author S. Bosco , author ...

    2024 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Bassi , author E.-A

    author author M. Bassi , author E.-A. \ Rodrıguez-Mena , author B. Brun , author S. Zihlmann , author T. Nguyen , author V. Champain , author J. C. \ Abadillo-Uriel , author B. Bertrand , author H. Niebojewski , author R. Maurand , author Y.-M. \ Niquet , author X. Jehl , auth...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.