REVIEW 1 cited by
Toward a M{\o}lmer S{\o}rensen Gate With .9999 Fidelity
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
Signed reviews
abstract
Realistic fault-tolerant quantum computing at reasonable overhead requires two-qubit gates with the highest possible fidelity. Typically, an infidelity of $\lesssim 10^{-4}$ is recommended in the literature. Focusing on the phase-sensitive architecture used in laboratories and by commercial companies to implement quantum computers, we show that even under noise-free, ideal conditions, neglecting the carrier term and linearizing the Lamb-Dicke term in the Hamiltonian used for control-pulse construction for generating M{\o}lmer-S{\o}rensen XX gates based on the Raman scheme are not justified if the goal is an infidelity target of $10^{-4}$. We obtain these results with a gate simulator code that, in addition to the computational space, explicitly takes the most relevant part of the phonon space into account. With the help of a Magnus expansion carried to the third order, keeping terms up to the fourth order in the Lamb-Dicke parameters, we identify the leading sources of coherent errors, which we show can be eliminated by adding a single linear equation to the phase-space closure conditions and subsequently adjusting the amplitude of the control pulse (calibration). This way, we obtain XX gates with infidelities $< 10^{-4}$.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Power-optimized amplitude modulation for robust trapped-ion entangling gates: a study of gate-timing errors
Adding one or two linear constraints on the Fourier coefficients of an amplitude-modulated Mølmer-Sørensen pulse improves the leading-order gate-timing error from O(Δt²) to O(Δt⁶) or O(Δt¹⁰) with vanishing power overhead.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.