pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05048 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-06 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Unlocking a fast adiabatic CZ gate and exact residual ZZ cancellation between fixed-frequency transmons using a floating tunable coupler

Angela Q. Chen , Xian Wu , Sarah Strong , Stefano Poletto
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords superconducting qubitstunable coupleradiabatic CZ gateresidual ZZ cancellationfixed-frequency transmonsquantum gate fidelityflux modulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A symmetric floating tunable coupler enables 24 ns adiabatic CZ gates with over 99.9 percent fidelity while keeping residual ZZ exactly zero at idle.

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

The paper shows that a symmetric floating tunable coupler between two fixed-frequency transmons creates an energy level structure supporting fast adiabatic controlled-Z gates. This structure permits rapid accumulation of the conditional phase for the gate while remaining adiabatic enough to limit errors, and it automatically sets residual ZZ interaction to zero whenever the qubits idle. The authors reach a 24-nanosecond gate with fidelity above 99.9 percent that holds steady for hours, relying on basic flux pulses plus targeted shaping to handle the briefest durations.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the symmetric floating tunable coupler provides a natural platform for fast, high-fidelity adiabatic CZ gates between fixed-frequency transmons. Its favorable energy-level structure eliminates the conventional trade-off between rapid conditional-phase accumulation and adiabatic evolution while preserving exact cancellation of residual ZZ interaction at idling. This architecture exhibits intrinsic robustness to non-adiabatic transitions even under simple flux modulation waveforms, enabling a 24 ns gate with fidelity exceeding 99.9 percent after pulse shaping based on the instantaneous adiabatic factor.

What carries the argument

The symmetric floating tunable coupler, whose design creates an energy-level structure that supports both fast conditional phase accumulation during flux modulation and exact ZZ=0 at the idle bias point.

If this is right

  • The architecture supports faster two-qubit gates without sacrificing idling isolation between qubits.
  • Simple flux modulation waveforms suffice for high performance, limiting the need for complex pulse engineering.
  • Stable operation over several hours makes repeated gate use practical in quantum circuits.
  • The approach works with fixed-frequency transmons, removing the requirement to adjust qubit frequencies for idling.
  • Pulse shaping based on the instantaneous adiabatic factor further reduces non-adiabatic errors at short durations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The coupler symmetry could simplify calibration in larger qubit arrays by removing separate ZZ compensation steps.
  • Similar symmetric coupler designs might extend to other entangling gates or three-qubit couplings if the level structure generalizes.
  • Further refinement of the adiabatic factor shaping could push reliable gate times below 20 ns while staying above target fidelity.

Load-bearing premise

The symmetric floating coupler's energy-level structure inherently eliminates the trade-off between rapid conditional-phase accumulation and adiabatic evolution while guaranteeing exact ZZ=0 at idle without requiring specialized pulse designs or qubit parameters beyond the reported architecture.

What would settle it

Measuring a non-zero residual ZZ interaction strength at the coupler's idle bias point or recording a fidelity below 99.9 percent for the 24 ns gate would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05048 by Angela Q. Chen, Sarah Strong, Stefano Poletto, Xian Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Simulated properties versus tunable coupler fre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Joint fit of spectroscopic data and dynamical phase [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Leakage amplification experiment with a 20 ns cosine [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Adiabatic CZ gate with different pulse shapes. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Benchmarking a 24 ns adiabatic CZ gate. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Schematic of the device wiring. Fixed-frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Simulation of the leakage amplification sequence. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Simulations of multiple adiabatic factors to iden [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Population averaged over flux pulse cycles. Columns indicate the measured state, where the initial state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Leakage amplification simulation for a target tunable [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Simulated properties of the symmetric coupler (left column) and asymmetric coupler (right column) systems with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Monte Carlo sampling in the unconstrained space of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Time trace of qubit coherence times measured at the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Impact of the coupler flux pulse on qubit coherence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Tunable couplers in superconducting qubit architectures enable strong qubit-qubit interactions for two-qubit gates while suppressing unwanted coupling during single-qubit operations. However, achieving low error rates for fast two-qubit gates remains challenging, as suppressing leakage and non-adiabatic errors typically requires specialized qubit, coupler, or pulse designs, often at the expense of an idling $ZZ=0$ condition. In this work, we demonstrate that a symmetric floating tunable coupler provides a natural platform for fast, high-fidelity adiabatic controlled-Z (CZ) gates. Its favorable energy-level structure eliminates the conventional trade-off between rapid conditional-phase accumulation and adiabatic evolution while preserving exact cancellation of residual $ZZ$ interaction at idling. This architecture exhibits intrinsic robustness to non-adiabatic transitions, even under simple flux modulation waveforms. To push performance at short gate durations, where maintaining adiabaticity becomes more challenging despite the favorable level structure, we introduce pulse-shaping techniques based on the instantaneous adiabatic factor that further suppress non-adiabatic errors. We experimentally realize a 24 ns adiabatic CZ gate with fidelity exceeding 99.9% and stable operation over several hours.

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

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript experimentally demonstrates a 24 ns adiabatic CZ gate with fidelity exceeding 99.9% between fixed-frequency transmons, realized via a symmetric floating tunable coupler. The architecture is shown to enable rapid conditional-phase accumulation while preserving exact residual ZZ cancellation at idling points, with intrinsic robustness to non-adiabatic errors under simple flux waveforms; an optional pulse-shaping method based on the instantaneous adiabatic factor is introduced to further suppress errors at short durations, and stable operation over several hours is reported.

Significance. If the central experimental claims hold, the result is significant for superconducting quantum computing: it resolves a key trade-off between gate speed and idling ZZ suppression without requiring specialized qubit parameters or complex pulse engineering, thereby simplifying calibration and reducing crosstalk in scalable processors. The reported fidelity, duration, and long-term stability are competitive with leading two-qubit gate demonstrations and could influence coupler design choices in future hardware.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Introduction / Theory section] The abstract and introduction state that the symmetric floating coupler 'preserves exact cancellation of residual ZZ interaction at idling,' but the manuscript should explicitly show the energy-level structure or Hamiltonian term responsible for this exact (not approximate) cancellation, ideally with a short derivation or numerical confirmation at the idle bias point.
  2. [Pulse shaping / Methods] The pulse-shaping technique is described as using the 'instantaneous adiabatic factor'; the manuscript should provide the explicit formula or algorithmic definition of this factor (including any cutoff or normalization) so that the shaping method can be reproduced from the text alone.
  3. [Experimental results] The experimental fidelity of >99.9% is a headline result; the manuscript should clarify whether this is the raw or error-mitigated value, the precise benchmarking protocol (e.g., interleaved randomized benchmarking), and the statistical uncertainty, as these details are load-bearing for the performance claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary of the work, recognition of its significance for superconducting quantum computing, and recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were provided in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; result is experimental validation of physical architecture

full rationale

The paper's core contribution is an experimental demonstration of a 24 ns adiabatic CZ gate with >99.9% fidelity using a symmetric floating tunable coupler, with claims of exact residual ZZ=0 at idle and intrinsic robustness to non-adiabatic errors. These rest on the reported physical energy-level structure of the coupler (verified via measurement and simple flux waveforms), not on any derivation that reduces by construction to fitted parameters, self-defined quantities, or load-bearing self-citations. No equations or steps in the abstract force the fidelity or ZZ cancellation as tautologies; the pulse-shaping is introduced as an optional enhancement rather than a circular fit. The result is self-contained against external benchmarks as a hardware experiment.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the physical realization of the coupler symmetry and adiabatic driving; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are stated in the abstract. Standard circuit QED assumptions are used.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The energy-level structure of the symmetric floating coupler eliminates the conventional trade-off between rapid conditional-phase accumulation and adiabatic evolution.
    Invoked in the abstract to justify the architecture choice.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5516 in / 1274 out tokens · 34909 ms · 2026-05-10T19:21:06.286916+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. A Qutrit Time Crystal Stabilized with Native Chiral Interactions

    quant-ph 2026-05 conditional novelty 8.0

    A Z3 discrete time crystal is realized in superconducting qutrits using native chiral interactions, producing robust period-tripling independent of initial state.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    F. Yan, P. Krantz, Y. Sung, M. Kjaergaard, D. L. Camp- bell, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Tunable coupling scheme for implementing high-fidelity two-qubit gates, Phys. Rev. Appl.10, 054062 (2018)

    2018

  2. [2]

    E. A. Sete, A. Q. Chen, R. Manenti, S. Kulshreshtha, and S. Poletto, Floating tunable coupler for scalable quantum computing architectures, Physical Review Applied15, 064063 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, W. Courtney, A. Dunsworth, E. Farhi, B. Foxen, A. Fowler, C. Gidney, M. Giustina, R. Graff, K. Guerin, S. Habegger, M. P. Harrigan, M. J. Hartmann, A. Ho, M. Hoffmann, T. Huang, T. S...

    2019

  4. [4]

    X. Li, T. Cai, H. Yan, Z. Wang, X. Pan, Y. Ma, W. Cai, J. Han, Z. Hua, X. Han, Y. Wu, H. Zhang, H. Wang, Y. Song, L. Duan, and L. Sun, Tunable coupler for real- izing a controlled-phase gate with dynamically decoupled 9 regime in a superconducting circuit, Phys. Rev. Appl.14, 024070 (2020)

    2020

  5. [5]

    Y. Sung, L. Ding, J. Braum¨ uller, A. Veps¨ al¨ ainen, B. Kan- nan, M. Kjaergaard, A. Greene, G. O. Samach, C. Mc- Nally, D. Kim, A. Melville, B. M. Niedzielski, M. E. Schwartz, J. L. Yoder, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Realization of high-fidelity cz andzz- free iswap gates with a tunable coupler, Phys. Rev. X11, 021058 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    Marxer, A

    F. Marxer, A. Veps¨ al¨ ainen, S. W. Jolin, J. Tuorila, A. Landra, C. Ockeloen-Korppi, W. Liu, O. Ahonen, A. Auer, L. Belzane, V. Bergholm, C. F. Chan, K. W. Chan, T. Hiltunen, J. Hotari, E. Hyypp¨ a, J. Ikonen, D. Janzso, M. Koistinen, J. Kotilahti, T. Li, J. Luus, M. Papic, M. Partanen, J. R¨ abin¨ a, J. Rosti, M. Savyt- skyi, M. Sepp¨ al¨ a, V. Sevriuk...

    2023

  7. [7]

    M. C. Collodo, J. Herrmann, N. Lacroix, C. K. Ander- sen, A. Remm, S. Lazar, J.-C. Besse, T. Walter, A. Wall- raff, and C. Eichler, Implementation of conditional phase gates based on tunablezzinteractions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 240502 (2020)

    2020

  8. [8]

    Y. Xu, J. Chu, J. Yuan, J. Qiu, Y. Zhou, L. Zhang, X. Tan, Y. Yu, S. Liu, J. Li, F. Yan, and D. Yu, High- fidelity, high-scalability two-qubit gate scheme for super- conducting qubits, Physical Review Letters125, 240503 (2020)

    2020

  9. [9]

    Stehlik, D

    J. Stehlik, D. M. Zajac, D. Underwood, T. Phung, J. Blair, S. Carnevale, D. Klaus, G. A. Keefe, A. Carniol, M. Kumph, M. Steffen, and O. E. Dial, Tunable coupling architecture for fixed-frequency transmon superconduct- ing qubits, Physical Review Letters127, 080505 (2021)

    2021

  10. [10]

    Majer, J

    J. Majer, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, J. Koch, B. R. Johnson, J. A. Schreier, L. Frunzio, D. I. Schuster, A. A. Houck, A. Wallraff, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Coupling superconducting qubits via a cavity bus, Nature449, 443 (2007)

    2007

  11. [11]

    Yamamoto, M

    T. Yamamoto, M. Neeley, E. Lucero, R. C. Bialczak, J. Kelly, M. Lenander, M. Mariantoni, A. D. O’Connell, D. Sank, H. Wang, M. Weides, J. Wenner, Y. Yin, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Martinis, Quantum process tomog- raphy of two-qubit controlled-z and controlled-not gates using superconducting phase qubits, Phys. Rev. B82, 184515 (2010)

    2010

  12. [12]

    Marxer, et al

    F. Marxer, J. Mro´ zek, J. Andersson, L. Abdurakhi- mov, J. Adam, V. Bergholm, R. Beriwal, C. F. Chan, S. Dahl, S. R. Das, F. Deppe, O. Fedorets, Z. Gao, A. G. Frieiro, D. Gusenkova, A. Guthrie, T. Hiltunen, H. Hsu, E. Hyypp¨ a, J. Ikonen, S. Inel, S. W. Jolin, A. Karis, S.-G. Kim, W. Kindel, A. Komlev, M. Koisti- nen, R. Kokkoniemi, S. Kumar, H.-S. Ku, J...

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Negˆ ırneac, H

    V. Negˆ ırneac, H. Ali, N. Muthusubramanian, F. Battis- tel, R. Sagastizabal, M. S. Moreira, J. F. Marques, W. J. Vlothuizen, M. Beekman, C. Zachariadis, N. Haider, A. Bruno, and L. DiCarlo, High-fidelity controlled-z gate with maximal intermediate leakage operating at the speed limit in a superconducting quantum processor, Physical Review Letters126, 220...

    2021

  14. [14]

    DiCarlo, J

    L. DiCarlo, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. S. Bishop, B. R. Johnson, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor, Nature460, 240 (2009)

    2009

  15. [15]

    Barends, A

    R. Barends, A. Shabani, L. Lamata, J. Kelly, A. Mezza- capo, U. L. Heras, R. Babbush, A. G. Fowler, B. Camp- bell, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, E. Jef- frey, E. Lucero, A. Megrant, J. Y. Mutus, M. Neeley, C. Neill, P. J. J. O’Malley, C. Quintana, P. Roushan, D. Sank, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, T. C. White, E. Solano, H. Neven, and J. M. Mart...

    2016

  16. [16]

    Chu and F

    J. Chu and F. Yan, Coupler-assisted controlled-phase gate with enhanced adiabaticity, Phys. Rev. Appl.16, 054020 (2021)

    2021

  17. [17]

    Goto, Double-transmon coupler: Fast two-qubit gate with no residual coupling for highly detuned supercon- ducting qubits, Physical Review Applied18, 034038 (2022)

    H. Goto, Double-transmon coupler: Fast two-qubit gate with no residual coupling for highly detuned supercon- ducting qubits, Physical Review Applied18, 034038 (2022)

    2022

  18. [18]

    R. Li, K. Kubo, Y. Ho, Z. Yan, Y. Nakamura, and H. Goto, Realization of high-fidelity cz gate based on a double-transmon coupler, Phys. Rev. X14, 041050 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    J. An, H. Zhang, Q. Ding, L. Ding, Y. Sung, R. Winik, J. Kim, I. T. Rosen, K. Azar, R. D. Pi˜ nero, J. M. Gertler, M. Gingras, B. M. Niedzielski, H. Stickler, M. E. Schwartz, J. ˆI. j. Wang, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, M. Hays, J. A. Grover, K. Serniak, and W. D. Oliver, ZZ-free two-transmon CZ gate mediated by a fluxonium coupler, arXiv:2511.02115 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Field, A

    M. Field, A. Q. Chen, B. Scharmann, E. A. Sete, F. Oruc, K. Vu, V. Kosenko, J. Y. Mutus, S. Poletto, and A. Best- wick, Modular superconducting-qubit architecture with a multichip tunable coupler, Phys. Rev. Appl.21, 054063 (2024)

    2024

  21. [21]

    Johansson, P

    J. Johansson, P. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP 2: A Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Computer Physics Communications184, 1234 (2013)

    2013

  22. [22]

    Kelly, R

    J. Kelly, R. Barends, B. Campbell, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, A. G. Fowler, I.-C. Hoi, E. Jef- frey, A. Megrant, J. Mutus, C. Neill, P. J. J. O’Malley, C. Quintana, P. Roushan, D. Sank, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, T. C. White, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Marti- nis, Optimal quantum control using randomized bench- marking, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, ...

    2014

  23. [23]

    D. P. Pappas, M. Field, C. J. Kopas, J. A. Howard, X. Wang, E. Lachman, J. Oh, L. Zhou, A. Gold, G. M. Stiehl, K. Yadavalli, E. A. Sete, A. Bestwick, M. J. Kramer, and J. Y. Mutus, Alternating-bias assisted an- nealing of amorphous oxide tunnel junctions, Communi- cations Materials5, 10.1038/s43246-024-00596-z (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s43246-024-00596-z 2024

  24. [24]

    X. Wang, J. Howard, E. A. Sete, G. Stiehl, C. Kopas, S. Poletto, X. Wu, M. Field, N. Sharac, C. Eckberg, H. Cansizoglu, R. Katta, J. Mutus, A. Bestwick, K. Ya- 10 davalli, and D. P. Pappas, Precision frequency tuning of tunable transmon qubits using alternating-bias assisted annealing, in2024 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineer...

    2024

  25. [25]

    Sagastizabal, S

    R. Sagastizabal, S. P. Premaratne, B. A. Klaver, M. A. Rol, V. Negˆ ırneac, M. S. Moreira, X. Zou, S. Johri, N. Muthusubramanian, M. Beekman, C. Zachariadis, V. P. Ostroukh, N. Haider, A. Bruno, A. Y. Mat- suura, and L. DiCarlo, Variational preparation of finite- temperature states on a quantum computer, npj Quan- tum Information7, 130 (2021)

    2021

  26. [26]

    J. Ku, X. Xu, M. Brink, D. C. McKay, J. B. Hertzberg, M. H. Ansari, and B. L. T. Plourde, Suppression of un- wantedzzinteractions in a hybrid two-qubit system, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 200504 (2020)

    2020

  27. [27]

    F. Bao, H. Deng, D. Ding, R. Gao, X. Gao, C. Huang, X. Jiang, H.-S. Ku, Z. Li, X. Ma, X. Ni, J. Qin, Z. Song, H. Sun, C. Tang, T. Wang, F. Wu, T. Xia, W. Yu, F. Zhang, G. Zhang, X. Zhang, J. Zhou, X. Zhu, Y. Shi, J. Chen, H.-H. Zhao, and C. Deng, Fluxonium: An alter- native qubit platform for high-fidelity operations, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 010502 (2022)

    2022

  28. [28]

    J. M. Martinis and M. R. Geller, Fast adiabatic qubit gates using onlyσ z control, Physical Review A90, 022307 (2014)

    2014

  29. [29]

    Kimmel, G

    S. Kimmel, G. H. Low, and T. J. Yoder, Robust calibra- tion of a universal single-qubit gate set via robust phase estimation, Phys. Rev. A92, 062315 (2015)

    2015

  30. [30]

    A. E. Russo, W. M. Kirby, K. M. Rudinger, A. D. Baczewski, and S. Kimmel, Consistency testing for ro- bust phase estimation, Phys. Rev. A103, 042609 (2021)

    2021

  31. [31]

    Magesan, J

    E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, B. R. Johnson, C. A. Ryan, J. M. Chow, S. T. Merkel, M. P. da Silva, G. A. Keefe, M. B. Rothwell, T. A. Ohki, M. B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen, Efficient measurement of quantum gate er- ror by interleaved randomized benchmarking, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 080505 (2012)

    2012

  32. [32]

    Magesan, J

    E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, Charac- terizing quantum gates via randomized benchmarking, Phys. Rev. A85, 042311 (2012)

    2012

  33. [33]

    A. D. C´ orcoles, J. M. Gambetta, J. M. Chow, J. A. Smolin, M. Ware, J. Strand, B. L. T. Plourde, and M. Steffen, Process verification of two-qubit quantum gates by randomized benchmarking, Phys. Rev. A87, 030301 (2013)

    2013

  34. [34]

    Akiba, S

    T. Akiba, S. Sano, T. Yanase, T. Ohta, and M. Koyama, Optuna: A next-generation hyperparameter optimiza- tion framework, inProceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Dis- covery and Data Mining(2019)

    2019

  35. [35]

    A. Gold, J. P. Paquette, A. Stockklauser, M. J. Reagor, M. S. Alam, A. Bestwick, N. Didier, A. Nersisyan, F. Oruc, A. Razavi, B. Scharmann, E. A. Sete, B. Sur, D. Venturelli, C. J. Winkleblack, F. Wudarski, M. Har- burn, and C. Rigetti, Entanglement across separate sil- icon dies in a modular superconducting qubit device, npj Quantum Information7, 10.1038...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-021-00484- 2021

  36. [36]

    J. Koch, T. M. Yu, J. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Charge-insensitive qubit design de- rived from the cooper pair box, Phys. Rev. A76, 042319 (2007). Supplementary material for: Unlocking a fast adiabatic CZ gate and exact residual ZZcancellation between fixed-frequency trans...

    2007

  37. [37]

    Frequency-independent coupling parameter Here we show how the transmon-transmonginterac- tion strength depends on frequency, and how it is linked to a frequency-independent coupling parameterρ. The couplingg 12 between transmon 1 and 2, which can be identified as qubit or coupler, is g12 = E12√ 2 EJ1 EC1 EJ2 EC2 1/4 withg 12 andE 12 the coupling factor an...

  38. [38]

    Adiabatic factor and non-adiabatic channels In this section, we look more closely at how the adi- abatic factor relates to leakage dynamics in simulations. The energy levels of the two-excitation manifold from the main text are replotted in Figure 7(a) for reference, and we focus specifically on the range 3–3.6 GHz (light blue area in Figure 7(a)). For th...

  39. [39]

    Comparing symmetric versus asymmetric tunable coupler systems We run Qutip simulations on a symmetric and asym- metric floating coupler system to compare the energy- level ordering and its implications. For the set of sim- ulations presented in this section, we use qubit frequen- 16 cies and anharmonicitiesf 1 = 4.2 GHz,f 2 = 4.3 GHz, ηq/2π=−0.22 GHz; tun...

  40. [40]

    Confidence intervals for binomial distributions Wald and Wilson intervals are commonly used to esti- mate confidence intervals for binomially distributed data. However, the choice of interval becomes important when dealing with small sample sizes or probabilities close to the physical boundaries (0 and 1), as is typical in high- fidelity RB experiments. T...

  41. [41]

    This is particularly problem- atic for decay models or high-fidelity gates, where ˆpis typically close to unity

    In these regimes, the normal approximation becomes inaccurate and the resulting interval may extend beyond the physical range [0,1]. This is particularly problem- atic for decay models or high-fidelity gates, where ˆpis typically close to unity. To ensure physically meaningful and statistically reli- able confidence intervals, especially in the small-samp...

  42. [42]

    Maximum Likelihood Estimation In a binomial distribution, the probability of measuring kpositive outcomes out ofNtrials is L= N k P k(1−P) N−k wherePis the theoretical probability distribution of the underlying model. For two-qubit RB measurements, the positive outcomes are associated with the system being measured in|00⟩, and the underlying model is P(m)...

  43. [43]

    To estimate the error on rCZ from the errors onp, a standard error-propagation formula is typically used

    Monte Carlo sampling for interleaved confidence intervals The fidelity of the two-qubit CZ gate is calculated from thepvalues of the reference and interleaved Clifford de- cay [31], using the equation: rCZ = d−1 d 1− piRB pRB ,(C1) wheredis the dimension of the two-qubit Hilbert space andp RB andp iRB are the depolarizing factors of the RB and interleaved...

  44. [44]

    At the idling point We present the idling coherence times of Q1 and Q2 over the 8.5 hour time-trace taken during the benchmark- ing of a 24-ns adiabatic CZ gate (Fig. 5(a-c)). At idling during this period, the median coherence times for Q1 (Q2) areT 1 = 81.4µs (91.2µs),T ∗ 2 = 49.7µs (89.5µs), andT 2E = 111.1µs (124.8µs); theT 2 of Q2 starts to de- grade ...

  45. [45]

    At the CZ operating point To get a more accurate estimation of qubit coher- ence time during the gate, we look specifically at what happens to the qubit coherence times when the coupler frequency is pulsed toward the qubit frequencies. In Fig. 15(a)-(b), we measureT 1 of the qubit with an addi- tional square dc-pulse applied to the TC after the qubit’s in...