Optical quantum computation with perpetually coupled spins

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 70, Issue 6, 2004, Pages

  Benjamin, Simon C ^a   Lovett, Brendon W ^a   Reina, John H ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b Ctro Internacional de Fisica   (Colombia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELECTRON ENERGY LEVELS; ELECTRONIC STRUCTURE; HAMILTONIANS; LASER PULSES; LIGHT POLARIZATION; MATRIX ALGEBRA; PHOTOLUMINESCENCE; QUANTUM THEORY; SEMICONDUCTOR QUANTUM DOTS;

DECOHERENCE; LASER EXCITATION; OPTICAL QUANTUM COMPUTATION; SINGLE-QUBIT ZEEMAN SPLITING;

QUANTUM OPTICS;

EID: 42749107247     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.060305     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. J. A. Jones and E. Knill, J. Magn. Reson. 141, 322 (1999).
2. T. Calarco et al., Phys. Rev. A 68, 012310 (2003).
3. A. Nazir et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 150502 (2004).
4. A. Rauschenbeutal et al., Science 288, 2024 (2000).
5. M. D. Barrett et al. Nature (London) 429, 737 (2004).
6. S. C. Benjamin and S. Bose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 247901 (2003).
7. S. C. Benjamin and S. Bose, Phys. Rev. A 70, 032314 (2004).
8. S. C. Benjamin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 017904 (2002).
9. X. Zhou et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 197903 (2002).
10. It is necessary either that (a) there are two physically distinct systems, alternating, or (b) that the laser can be selectively targeted to individual units along an identical chain. We assume the former.
11. 01 are very far off resonance). It follows that pacification either by shelving to |T〉, or our rapid regular cycling, will generate only a known deterministic phase rotation which can be subsumed into the natural qubit phase accumulation.
12. K. Hammerer, G. Vidal, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A 66, 062321 (2002).
13. G. Mahler and V. A. Weberruß, Quantum Networks (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995).
14. In Fig. 2 the decay rate γ is mapped to an effective decay probability by comparing the graphs for one set of parameters, then this same value is used in all other plots.
15. P. Facchi, H. Nakazato, and S. Pascazio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2699 (2001).
16. The numerical experiment proceeded just as before, except that now |init〉=1/2(|00〉+|01〉+|10〉+|11〉), the two-qubit equal superposition, and similarly for |ideal〉 and F. Behavior was exactly as expected; please see http://www.nanotech.org/openResources/barrier.html.
17. T. Unold et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 157401 (2004).
18. A. Zrenner et al., Nature (London) 418, 612 (2002).
19. P. Borri et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 267401 (2003).
20. D. Birkedal, K. Loesson, and J. M. Hvam, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 227401 (2001).
21. J. C. Chen, A. M. Chang, and M. R. Melloch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 176801 (2004).
22. N. J. Craig et al., Science 304, 565 (2004).
23. R. Hanson et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 196802 (2003).
24. M. Bayer, O. Stern, P. Hawrylak, S. Fafard, and A. Forchel, Nature (London) 405, 923 (2004).
25. S. Cortez et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 207401 (2002).
26. M. Kroutvar et al., Nature (London) 432, 81 (2004).
27. A. Shabaev et al., Phys. Rev. B 68, 201305(R) (2003).
28. W. Harneit, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032322 (2002).
29. J. J. L. Morton and M. A. G. Jones (unpublished).
30. S. C. Benjamin, New J. Phys. 6, 61 (2004).
31. J. L. Li et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 066101 (2002).
32. S. A. Crooker et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 186802 (2002).
33. J. L. Herek et al., Nature (London) 417, 533 (2002).