Do you want to publish a course? Click here

Gradient-based closed-loop quantum optimal control in a solid-state two-qubit system

62   0   0.0 ( 0 )
 Added by Franklin Cho
 Publication date 2018
  fields Physics
and research's language is English




Ask ChatGPT about the research

Quantum optimal control can play a crucial role to realize a set of universal quantum logic gates with error rates below the threshold required for fault-tolerance. Open-loop quantum optimal control relies on accurate modeling of the quantum system under control, and does not scale efficiently with system size. These problems can be avoided in closed-loop quantum optimal control, which utilizes feedback from the system to improve control fidelity. In this paper, two gradient-based closed-loop quantum optimal control algorithms, the hybrid quantum-classical approach (HQCA) described in [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 150503 (2017)] and the finite-difference (FD) method, are experimentally investigated and compared to the open-loop quantum optimal control utilizing the gradient ascent method. We employ a solid-state ensemble of coupled electron-nuclear spins serving as a two-qubit system. Specific single-qubit and two-qubit state preparation gates are optimized using the closed-loop and open-loop methods. The experimental results demonstrate the implemented closed-loop quantum control outperforms the open-loop control in our system. Furthermore, simulations reveal that HQCA is more robust than the FD method to gradient noise which originates from measurement noise in this experimental setting. On the other hand, the FD method is more robust to control field distortions coming from non-ideal hardware



rate research

Read More

We provide a rigorous analysis of the quantum optimal control problem in the setting of a linear combination $s(t)B+(1-s(t))C$ of two noncommuting Hamiltonians $B$ and $C$. This includes both quantum annealing (QA) and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA). The target is to minimize the energy of the final ``problem Hamiltonian $C$, for a time-dependent and bounded control schedule $s(t)in [0,1]$ and $tin mc{I}:= [0,t_f]$. It was recently shown, in a purely closed system setting, that the optimal solution to this problem is a ``bang-anneal-bang schedule, with the bangs characterized by $s(t)= 0$ and $s(t)= 1$ in finite subintervals of $mc{I}$, in particular $s(0)=0$ and $s(t_f)=1$, in contrast to the standard prescription $s(0)=1$ and $s(t_f)=0$ of quantum annealing. Here we extend this result to the open system setting, where the system is described by a density matrix rather than a pure state. This is the natural setting for experimental realizations of QA and QAOA. For finite-dimensional environments and without any approximations we identify sufficient conditions ensuring that either the bang-anneal, anneal-bang, or bang-anneal-bang schedules are optimal, and recover the optimality of $s(0)=0$ and $s(t_f)=1$. However, for infinite-dimensional environments and a system described by an adiabatic Redfield master equation we do not recover the bang-type optimal solution. In fact we can only identify conditions under which $s(t_f)=1$, and even this result is not recovered in the fully Markovian limit. The analysis, which we carry out entirely within the geometric framework of Pontryagin Maximum Principle, simplifies using the density matrix formulation compared to the state vector formulation.
To exploit a given physical system for quantum information processing, it is critical to understand the different types of noise affecting quantum control. Distinguishing coherent and incoherent errors is extremely useful as they can be reduced in different ways. Coherent errors are generally easier to reduce at the hardware level, e.g. by improving calibration, whereas some sources of incoherent errors, e.g. T2* processes, can be reduced by engineering robust pulses. In this work, we illustrate how purity benchmarking and randomized benchmarking can be used together to distinguish between coherent and incoherent errors and to quantify the reduction in both of them due to using optimal control pulses and accounting for the transfer function in an electron spin resonance system. We also prove that purity benchmarking provides bounds on the optimal fidelity and diamond norm that can be achieved by correcting the coherent errors through improving calibration.
Full quantum state tomography is used to characterize the state of an ensemble based qubit implemented through two hyperfine levels in Pr3+ ions, doped into a Y2SiO5 crystal. We experimentally verify that single-qubit rotation errors due to inhomogeneities of the ensemble can be suppressed using the Roos-Moelmer dark state scheme. Fidelities above >90%, presumably limited by excited state decoherence, were achieved. Although not explicitly taken care of in the Roos-Moelmer scheme, it appears that also decoherence due to inhomogeneous broadening on the hyperfine transition is largely suppressed.
125 - S. Rosi , A. Bernard , N. Fabbri 2013
We present experimental evidence of the successful closed-loop optimization of the dynamics of cold atoms in an optical lattice. We optimize the loading of an ultracold atomic gas minimizing the excitations in an array of one-dimensional tubes (3D-1D crossover) and we perform an optimal crossing of the quantum phase-transition from a Superfluid to a Mott-Insulator in a three-dimensional lattice. In both cases we enhance the experiment performances with respect to those obtained via adiabatic dynamics, effectively speeding up the process by more than a factor three while improving the quality of the desired transformation.
We present an example of quantum process tomography performed on a single solid state qubit. The qubit used is two energy levels of the triplet state in the Nitrogen-Vacancy defect in Diamond. Quantum process tomography is applied to a qubit which has been allowed to decohere for three different time periods. In each case the process is found in terms of the $chi$ matrix representation and the affine map representation. The discrepancy between experimentally estimated process and the closest physically valid process is noted.
comments
Fetching comments Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
mircosoft-partner

هل ترغب بارسال اشعارات عن اخر التحديثات في شمرا-اكاديميا