Optimal control of the silicon-based donor-electron-spin quantum computing

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 79, Issue 6, 2009, Pages

  Tsai, Dong Bang ^a   Chen, Po Wen ^a   Goan, Hsi Sheng ^a  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CNOT GATE; CONTROL SEQUENCES; CONTROL VOLTAGES; CONTROLLED-NOT; CURRENT FABRICATION; DIPOLE DIPOLE INTERACTIONS; DISTANCE CONSTRAINTS; DONOR ATOMS; ELECTRON SPINS; ERROR THRESHOLD; EXTERNAL CONTROL; FAULT-TOLERANT QUANTUM COMPUTATION; GLOBAL CONTROL; GRADIENT ASCENT; HIGH FIDELITY; HYPERFINE; OPERATION TIME; OPTIMAL CONTROL METHODS; OPTIMAL CONTROLS; QUANTUM COMPUTING; SILICON-BASED;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; LOGIC GATES; OPTIMIZATION; QUANTUM COMPUTERS; QUANTUM OPTICS; QUANTUM THEORY; SEMICONDUCTING SILICON COMPOUNDS;

SPIN FLUCTUATIONS;

EID: 67549128982     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.060306     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. P. Aliferis and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 79, 012332 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.012332
2. N. Khaneja, J. Magn. Reson. 172, 296 (2005). 10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.004
3. H. Yuan and N. Khaneja, Phys. Rev. A 72, 040301 (R) (2005) 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.040301
4. T. Schulte-Herbrüggen, Phys. Rev. A 72, 042331 (2005) 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.042331
5. N. Khaneja, Phys. Rev. A 75, 012322 (2007) 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.012322
6. R. Zeier, Phys. Rev. A 77, 032332 (2008) 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032332
7. A. Carlini, Phys. Rev. A 75, 042308 (2007) 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.042308
8. S. Montangero, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 170501 (2007) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99. 170501
9. G. Gordon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 010403 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101. 010403
10. A. Spörl, Phys. Rev. A 75, 012302 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.012302
11. B. E. Kane, Nature (London) 393, 133 (1998) 10.1038/30156
12. B. E. Kane, Fortschr. Phys. 48, 1023 (2000). 10.1002/1521-3978(200009)48: 9/11<1023::AID-PROP1023>3.0.CO;2-J
13. H.-S. Goan, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 3, 27 (2005) 10.1142/S0219749905001225
14. L. C. L. Hollenberg, Phys. Rev. B 74, 045311 (2006) 10.1103/PhysRevB.74. 045311
15. C. J. Wellard, Phys. Rev. B 68, 195209 (2003) 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.195209
16. B. Koiller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 027903 (2001) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88. 027903
17. L. M. Kettle, Phys. Rev. B 73, 115205 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.115205
18. C. D. Hill and H.-S. Goan, Phys. Rev. A 68, 012321 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.012321
19. C. D. Hill and H.-S. Goan, Phys. Rev. A 70, 022310 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.022310
20. C. D. Hill, Phys. Rev. B 72, 045350 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevB.72.045350
21. T. Yamamoto, Nature (London) 425, 941 (2003). 10.1038/nature02015
22. L. M. Kettle, Phys. Rev. B 68, 075317 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.075317
23. Our architecture is similar to that of, so we may use the same methods proposed there to initialize the nuclear spins in the spin-up state. Alternatively, we may read out the electron-spin state (e.g. as described in) or wait until the electron spins relax to the spin-down ground state then apply MW and rf pulse to initialize the electron spins in the spin-up state and then to swap the nuclear- and electron-spin states. According to our simulations, the error in the initial nuclear-spin-up polarization should be kept smaller than 10-4 (or 10-3) in order to maintain FTQC.
24. C. Herring, Phys. Rev. 134, A362 (1964). 10.1103/PhysRev.134.A362
25. O.-P. Saira, Phys. Rev. A 75, 012308 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.012308
26. A. M. Tyryshkin, Phys. Rev. B 68, 193207 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevB.68. 193207