Control-limited perfect state transfer, quantum stochastic resonance, and many-body entangling gate in imperfect qubit registers

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 77, Issue 6, 2008, Pages

  Di Franco, C ^a   Paternostro, M ^a   Tsomokos, D I ^b   Huelga, S F ^b  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOCONVERSION; CIRCUIT RESONANCE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE; MOLECULAR PHYSICS; QUANTUM OPTICS; STOCHASTIC PROGRAMMING;

AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (APS); CONNECTIONS (STRUCTURAL); ENTANGLING GATE; MANY-BODY; MARKOVIAN; MULTIPARTITE ENTANGLEMENTS; NOISE SOURCES; QUANTUM STATE TRANSFERS; QUANTUM STOCHASTIC RESONANCE; QUBIT REGISTERS; SPATIALLY CORRELATED; STATE TRANSFER; SUPERCONDUCTING QUBITS (SQ);

RESONANCE;

EID: 46349100409     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.062337     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. L. Amico, R. Fazio, A. Osterloh, and V. Vedral, Rev. Mod. Phys. RMPHAT 0034-6861 10.1103/RevModPhys.80.517 80, 517 (2007).
2. S. C. Benjamin and S. Bose, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.247901 90, 247901 (2003).
3. M. Christandl, N. Datta, A. Ekert, and A. J. Landahl, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.187902 92, 187902 (2004)
4. C. Albanese, M. Christandl, N. Datta, and A. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.230502 93, 230502 (2004)
5. M. Christandl, N. Datta, T. C. Dorlas, A. Ekert, A. Kay, and A. J. Landahl, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.71.032312 71, 032312 (2005).
6. P. Kok, W. J. Munro, K. Nemoto, T. C. Ralph, J. P. Dowling, and G. J. Milburn, Rev. Mod. Phys. RMPHAT 0034-6861 10.1103/RevModPhys.79.135 79, 135 (2007).
7. S. Bose, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.207901 91, 207901 (2003).
8. M. B. Plenio, J. Hartley, and J. Eisert, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/6/1/036 6, 36 (2004)
9. M. Paternostro, G. M. Palma, M. S. Kim, and G. Falci, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.71.042311 71, 042311 (2005)
10. D. Burgarth and S. Bose, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.71.052315 71, 052315 (2005)
11. V. Giovannetti and D. Burgarth, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.030501 96, 030501 (2006)
12. O. Romero-Isart, K. Eckert, and A. Sanpera, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.050303 75, 050303 (R) (2007)
13. A. Kay, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.010501 98, 010501 (2007)
14. A. Biswas and G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.022323 70, 022323 (2004)
15. M. B. Plenio and F. L. Semiao, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/7/1/073 7, 73 (2005).
16. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, e-print arXiv:quant-ph/0702225 (2007)
17. M. B. Plenio and S. Virmani, Quantum Inf. Comput. QICUAW 1533-7146 7, 1 (2007).
18. D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger, Bell Theorem, Quantum Theory, and Conceptions of the Universe, edited by, M. Kafatos, (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1989), p. 69.
19. M. Hillery, V. Buek, and A. Berthiaume, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.59.1829 59, 1829 (1999)
20. C. Schmid, P. Trojek, M. Bourennane, C. Kurtsiefer, M. Zukowski, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.230505 95, 230505 (2005).
21. A. M. Wang, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.062323 75, 062323 (2007)
22. C. Di Franco, M. Paternostro, and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.052316 75, 052316 (2007)
23. M. Christandl and C. Wehner, in Proceedings of 11th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security (ASIACRYPT 2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 3788 (Springer, Berlin, 2005), p. 217.
24. For an analogous decomposition performed with respect to Eq. 4, see S. R. Clark, C. Moura Alves, and D. Jaksch, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/7/1/124 7, 124 (2005).
25. M. B. Plenio and S. F. Huelga, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.197901 88, 197901 (2002)
26. S. F. Huelga and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.170601 98, 170601 (2007).
27. Y. Makhlin and G. Schön Schnirman, Rev. Mod. Phys. RMPHAT 0034-6861 10.1103/RevModPhys.73.357 73, 357 (2001).
28. J. Q. You and F. Nori, Phys. Today PHTOAD 0031-9228 58, 42 (2005).
29. D. I. Tsomokos, M. J. Hartmann, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/9/3/079 9, 79 (2007).
30. D. Vion, A. Aassime, A. Cottet, P. Joyez, H. Pothier, C. Urbina, D. Esteve, and M. H. Devoret, Science SCIEAS 0036-8075 10.1126/science.1069372 296, 886 (2002).
31. Y. A. Pashkin, T. Yamamoto, O. Astafiev, Y. Nakamura, D. V. Averin, and J. S. Tsai, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature01365 421, 823 (2003)
32. T. Yamamoto, Y. A. Pashkin, O. Astaviev, Y. Nakamura, and J. S. Tsai, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature02015 425, 941 (2003).
33. J. Plantenberg, P. C. de Groot, C. J. P. M. Harmans, and J. E. Mooij, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature05896 447, 836 (2007).
34. For a recent account of experiments with superconducting qubits that are coupled in a controllable way, see S. Ashhab, A. O. Niskanen, K. Harrabi, Y. Nakamura, T. Picot, P. C. de Groot, C. J. P. M. Harmans, J. E. Mooij, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.014510 77, 014510 (2008).
35. J. E. Mooij (private communication).
36. E. Lieb, T. Schultz, and D. Mattis, Ann. Phys. ANPYA2 0003-3804 10.1016/0003-4916(61)90115-4 16, 407 (1961)
37. S. Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
38. C. Di Franco, M. Paternostro, G. M. Palma, and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.042316 76, 042316 (2007).
39. C. Di Franco, M. Paternostro, and G. M. Palma, e-print arXiv:0802.3980.
40. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000).
41. C. Di Franco, M. Paternostro, and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.020303 77, 020303 (R) (2008).
42. For a different model of disorder, see G. De Chiara, D. Rossini, S. Montangero, and R. Fazio, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.72. 012323 72, 012323 (2005).
43. D. Burgarth, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 151, 147 (2007) 1951-6355
44. M. Wiesniak, e-print arXiv:0711.2357
45. C. K. Burrell and T. J. Osborne, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.167201 99, 167201 (2007)
46. L. Zhou, J. Lu, T. Shi, and C. P. Sun, e-print arXiv:0608135.
47. For charge qubits at 20-40 mK the typical disorder strength is between 5 and 10% [F. Paauw and P. de Groot (private communication)].
48. I. L. Chuang and M. A. Nielsen, J. Mod. Opt. JMOPEW 0950-0340 10.1080/095003497152609 44, 2455 (1997).
49. M. A. Nielsen, E. Knill, and R. Laflamme, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/23891 396, 52 (1998)
50. J. B. Altepeter, D. Branning, E. Jeffrey, T. C. Wei, P. G. Kwiat, R. T. Thew, J. L. O'Brien, M. A. Nielsen, and A. G. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.193601 90, 193601 (2003)
51. J. L. O'Brien, G. J. Pryde, A. Gilchrist, D. F. V. James, N. K. Langford, T. C. Ralph, and A. G. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.080502 93, 080502 (2004)
52. N. K. Langford, T. J. Weinhold, R. Prevedel, A. Gilchrist, J. L. O'Brien, G. J. Pryde, and A. G. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.210504 95, 210504 (2005)
53. Y. Nambu and K. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.010404 94, 010404 (2005)
54. M. Howard, J. Twamley, C. Wittmann, T. Gaebel, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, N. J. Phys. 8, 33 (2006) 1367-2630
55. T. Yamamoto, R. Nagase, J. Shimamura, S. K. Azdemir, M. Koashi, and N. Imoto, N. J. Phys. 9, 191 (2007) 1367-2630
56. R. Prevedel, M. S. Tame, A. Stefanov, M. Paternostro, M. S. Kim, and A. Zeilinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.250503 99, 250503 (2007).
57. M. S. Tame, M. Paternostro, and M. S. Kim, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/9/6/201 9, 201 (2007).
58. M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.60.1888 60, 1888 (1999).
59. J. Preskill, Lecture notes in physics, available at http://www.theory. caltech.edu/people/preskill/ph229/
60. J. Dalibard, Y. Castin, and K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.580 68, 580 (1992)
61. M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, Rev. Mod. Phys. RMPHAT 0034-6861 10.1103/RevModPhys.70.101 70, 101 (1998).
62. For weakly coupled spins J∼1 GHz is experimentally reasonable in charge qubits (the coupling between two qubits in Ref. was around 10 GHz). This implies the rather pessimistic values of Γ-1 ∼0.2 ns and γ-1 ∼0.5 ns, which are one order of magnitude smaller than the decoherence time estimated experimentally in Ref. for two coupled charge qubits.
63. L. Hartmann, W. Dür, and H.-J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.052304 74, 052304 (2006)
64. L. Hartmann, W. Dür, and H.-J. Briegel, New J. Phys. NJOPFM 1367-2630 10.1088/1367-2630/9/7/230 9, 230 (2007).
65. G. Bowen and S. Mancini, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/j.physleta.2005.12.083 352, 272 (2006).
66. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Opt. Commun. OPCOB8 0030-4018 10.1016/j.optcom.2006.01.061 264, 393 (2006).
67. D. E. Makarov and N. Makri, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.52.R2257 52, R2257 (1995)
68. M. Grifoni and P. Hänggi, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.76.1611 76, 1611 (1996)
69. S. F. Huelga and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.62.052111 62, 052111 (2000)
70. T. Wellens and A. Buchleitner, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.5118 84, 5118 (2000)
71. L. Viola, E. M. Fortunato, S. Lloyd, C.-H. Tseng, and D. G. Cory, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.5466 84, 5466 (2000).
72. As an additional remark, we briefly mention about the possibility of an error in the timing of the process. The protocol requires the extraction of the logical state after the precise time t=π/ (4J), which corresponds to the maximum of the state fidelity. This is obviously equivalent to switching off the mutual interspin interaction at time π/ (4J) and extracting the state at the N th spin in the chain. As we have already said, a realistic choice for J is in the range of 1 GHz (it can be larger) while the temporal window within which, typically, the state fidelity is larger than 0.9 (an arbitrary and rather conservative choice) is as large as JΔt 0.2. This leads to Δt being typically in the range of 0.1 ns, which can be perfectly resolved experimentally.
73. C. Simon and J. Kempe, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.65. 052327 65, 052327 (2002)
74. M. S. Tame, M. Paternostro, M. S. Kim, and V. Vedral, Int. J. Quantum Inf. ZZZZZZ 0219-7499 4, 689 (2006).