Natural two-qubit gate for quantum computation using the XY interaction

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 67, Issue 3, 2003, Pages

  Schuch, Norbert ^a   Siewert, Jens ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF REGENSBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; ERROR CORRECTION; HAMILTONIANS; LOGIC GATES; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; MATRIX ALGEBRA;

QUANTUM COMPUTATION; QUANTUM GATES;

QUANTUM THEORY;

EID: 0038175252     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. J.-L. Brylinski and R. Brylinski, in Mathematics of Quantum Computation, edited by R. Brylinski and G. Chen (Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, 2002).
2. M.J. Bremner, C.M. Dawson, J.L. Dodd, A. Gilchrist, A.W. Harrow, D. Mortimer, M.A. Nielsen, and T.J. Osborne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 247902 (2002).
3. A. Barenco, C. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. DiVincenzo, N. Margolus, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. A 52, 3457 (1995).
4. D. Loss and D. DiVicenzo, Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998).
5. E. Biolatti, R. Iotti, P. Zanardi, and F. Rossi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5647 (2000).
6. T.P. Orlando, J.E. Mooij, L. Tian, C.H. van der Wal, L.S. Levitov, S. Lloyd, and J.J. Mazo, Phys. Rev. B 60, 15 398 (1999).
7. J. Siewert, R. Fazio, G.M. Palma, and E. Sciacca, J. Low Temp. Phys. 118, 795 (2000).
8. Y. Makhlin, G. Schön, and A. Shnirman, Nature (London) 398, 305 (1999).
9. B. Kane, Nature (London) 393, 133 (1998).
10. R. Vrijen, E. Yablonovitch, K. Wang, H.W. Jiang, A. Balandin, V. Roychowdhury, T. Mor, and D. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A 62, 012306 (2000).
11. A. Imamoglu, D.D. Awschalom, G. Burkard, D.P. DiVincenzo, D. Loss, M. Sherwin, and A. Small, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4204 (1999).
12. D. Mozyrsky, V. Privman, and M. Glasser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5112 (2001).
13. Y. Makhlin, e-print quant-ph/0002045 (2000).
14. J. Siewert and R. Fazio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 257905 (2001).
15. J. Kempe, D. Bacon, D.P. DiVincenzo, and K. Whaley, Quantum Inf. Comput. 1, 33 (2001).
16. P. Echternach, C.P. Williams, S.C. Dultz, P. Delsing, S. Braunstein, and J.P. Dowling, Quantum Inf. Comput. 1, 143 (2001).
17. G. Vidal, K. Hammerer, and J.I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 237902 (2002).
18. D. Divincenzo and P. Shor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3260 (1996).
19. V. Vedral, A. Barenco, and A. Ekert, Phys. Rev. A 54, 147 (1996).
20. D. DiVincenzo, Proc. R. Soc. London 454, 261 (1998).
21. S.L. Braunstein and J.A. Smolin, Phys. Rev. A 55, 945 (1997).
22. G. Burkard, D. Loss, D.P. DiVincenzo, and J.A. Smolin, Phys. Rev. B 60, 11 404 (1999).
23. R. Cleve, A. Ekert, C. Macchiavello, and M. Mosca, Proc. R. Soc. London 454, 339 (1998).
24. T.G. Draper, e-print quant-ph/0008033 (2000).
25. S. Beauregard, e-print quant-ph/0205095 (2002).
26. Formally a parallel execution looks feasible also if thed network can be implemented with physical couplings between arbitrary pair of bits, in particular between the ancillas and each encoding qubit. Note, however, that in such schemes there is typically only one channel that mediates the coupling between the various qubits [11,8]. Consequently, simultaneous execution of several two-qubit operations would result in N-qubit dynamics (N > 2) which is to be excluded. Therefore, in certain cases application of nearest-neighbor coupling appears to be even more powerful than coupling between arbitrary pairs of qubits.