Dynamical quantum error correction of unitary operations with bounded controls

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 80, Issue 3, 2009, Pages

  Khodjasteh, Kaveh ^a   Viola, Lorenza ^a  

^a Dartmouth College   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BOUNDED CONTROLS; DECOHERENCE; DECOHERENCE SUPPRESSION; ERROR MODEL; EXPLICIT CONSTRUCTIONS; NON-MARKOVIAN; OPEN LOOPS; PARAMETER RANGE; PURE-DEPHASING; QUANTUM ERROR CORRECTIONS; QUANTUM GATES; SYSTEMATIC CONTROL; UNITARY OPERATION;

LOGIC GATES; QUANTUM ELECTRONICS; SYSTEMATIC ERRORS;

ERROR CORRECTION;

EID: 70349232360     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.032314     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. D. P. DiVincenzo, Fortschr. Phys. 48, 771 (2000). 10.1002/1521- 3978(200009)48:9/11<771::AID-PROP771>3.0.CO;2-E
2. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2000).
3. A. Y. Kitaev, Russ. Math. Surveys 52, 1191 (1997). 10.1070/ RM1997v052n06ABEH002155
4. J. Preskill, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 454, 385 (1998). 10.1098/rspa.1998.0167
5. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. H. Zurek, Science 279, 342 (1998). 10.1126/science.279.5349.342
6. A. M. Steane, Phys. Rev. A 68, 042322 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.042322
7. E. Knill, Nature (London) 434, 39 (2005). 10.1038/nature03350
8. U. Haeberlen, High Resolution NMR in Solids: Selective Averaging (Academic Press, New York, 1976).
9. D. G. Cory, Fortschr. Phys. 48, 875 (2000). 10.1002/1521-3978(200009)48: 9/11<875::AID-PROP875>3.0.CO;2-V
10. C. Ryan, C. Negrevergne, M. Laforest, E. Knill, and R. Laflamme, e-print arXiv:0803.1982.
11. L. Viola and S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. A 58, 2733 (1998). 10.1103/PhysRevA.58. 2733
12. L. Viola, E. Knill, and S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2417 (1999). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.2417
13. L. Viola and E. Knill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 060502 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.060502
14. L. F. Santos and L. Viola, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 150501 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.150501
15. K. Khodjasteh and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 180501 (2005) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.180501
16. K. Khodjasteh and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. A 75, 062310 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.062310
17. G. S. Uhrig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 100504 (2007) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98. 100504
18. G. S. Uhrig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 120502 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 102.120502
19. A. J. Berglund, e-print arXiv:quant-ph/0010001.
20. E. Fraval, M. J. Sellars, and J. J. Longdell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 030506 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.030506
21. J. Morton, A. Tyryshkin, A. Ardavan, S. Benjamin, K. Porfyrakis, S. Lyon, and G. Briggs, Nat. Phys. 2, 40 (2006). 10.1038/nphys192
22. J. Morton, A. Tyryshkin, R. Brown, S. Shankar, B. Lovett, A. Ardavan, T. Schenkel, E. Haller, J. Ager, and S. A. Lyon, Nature (London) 455, 1085 (2008). 10.1038/nature07295
23. S. Damodarakurup, M. Lucamarini, G. Di Giuseppe, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 040502 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.040502
24. M. J. Biercuk, H. Uys, A. P. VanDevender, N. Shiga, W. M. Itano, and J. J. Bollinger, Nature 458, 996 (2009). 10.1038/nature07951
25. M. J. Biercuk, H. Uys, A. P. VanDevender, N. Shiga, W. M. Itano, and J. J. Bollinger, Phys. Rev. A 79, 062324 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.062324
26. K. Khodjasteh and L. Viola, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 080501 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.080501
27. M. H. Levitt, Prog. Nucl. Magn. Reson. Spectrosc. 18, 61 (1986). 10.1016/0079-6565(86)80005-X
28. W. G. Alway and J. A. Jones, J. Magn. Reson. 189, 114 (2007). 10.1016/j.jmr.2007.09.001
29. K. R. Brown, A. W. Harrow, and I. L. Chuang, Phys. Rev. A 70, 052318 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.052318
30. N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, T. Schulte-Herbrüggen, and S. J. Glaser, J. Magn. Reson. 172, 296 (2005). 10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.004
31. C. D. Hill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 180501 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98. 180501
32. E. M. Fortunato, M. A. Pravia, N. Boulant, G. Teklemariam, T. F. Havel, and D. G. Cory, J. Chem. Phys. 116, 7599 (2002). 10.1063/1.1465412
33. N. Boulant, K. Edmonds, J. Yang, M. A. Pravia, and D. G. Cory, Phys. Rev. A 68, 032305 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.032305
34. B. Luy, K. Kozbar, T. E. Skinner, N. Khaneja, and S. J. Glaser, J. Magn. Reson. 176, 179 (2005). 10.1016/j.jmr.2005.06.002
35. S. Pasini, T. Fischer, P. Karbach, and G. S. Uhrig, Phys. Rev. A 77, 032315 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032315
36. L. P. Pryadko and G. Quiroz, Phys. Rev. A 77, 012330 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.012330
37. P. Sengupta and L. P. Pryadko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 037202 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.037202
38. L. Viola and E. Knill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 037901 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.037901
39. B. M. Terhal and G. Burkard, Phys. Rev. A 71, 012336 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevA.71.012336
40. K. Khodjasteh, D. A. Lidar, and L. Viola, e-print arXiv:0908.1526.
41. W. H. Zurek, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 715 (2003). 10.1103/RevModPhys.75.715
42. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002).
43. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and L. Viola, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2525 (2000). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.2525
44. R. Bhatia, Matrix Analysis, No. 169 in Graduate Texts in Mathematics (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997).
45. D. A. Lidar, P. Zanardi, and K. Khodjasteh, Phys. Rev. A 78, 012308 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.78.012308
46. K. Khodjasteh and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. A 78, 012355 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.78.012355
47. D. D'Alessandro, Introduction to Quantum Control and Dynamics (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2007).
48. H. Uys, M. J. Biercuk, and J. J. Bollinger, e-print arXiv:0904.0036.
49. L. F. Santos and L. Viola, New J. Phys. 10, 083009 (2008). 10.1088/1367-2630/10/8/083009
50. M. Rötteler and P. Wocjan, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 52, 4171 (2006). 10.1109/TIT.2006.880059
51. L. Viola, E. Knill, and S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3520 (2000). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.3520
52. L. Viola, Phys. Rev. A 66, 012307 (2002). 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.012307
53. D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 160506 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 100.160506
54. Within the radius of convergence, the Magnus expansion is absolutely convergent. This fact can be used to cap the sum of the higher-order terms, see, e.g.,.
55. P. Aliferis and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 78, 052331 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.78.052331
56. The so-called Uhrig DD is an example where the algebraic simplicity of the dephasing model is exploited to obtain an efficient DQEC protocol.
57. L. Viola, J. Mod. Opt. 51, 2357 (2004). 10.1080/09500340408231795
58. Interestingly, a close-in-spirit implementation has been recently reported for dynamical suppression of collisional decoherence in cold trapped atoms. See Y. Sagi, I. Almog, and N. Davidson, e-print arXiv:0905.0286.
59. L. Viola, S. Lloyd, and E. Knill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4888 (1999). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.4888
60. D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998). 10.1103/PhysRevA.57.120
61. R. Hanson, L. P. Kouwenhoven, J. R. Petta, S. Tarucha, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 1217 (2007). 10.1103/RevModPhys.79.1217
62. W. Zhang, N. P. Konstantinidis, K. A. Al-Hassanieh, and V. V. Dobrovitski, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 19, 083202 (2007). 10.1088/0953-8984/19/ 8/083202
63. Identical DCG constructions would be valid if the Heisenberg interaction is replaced by any two-qubit Hamiltonian commuting with Sα (all) (e.g., the Ising interaction).
64. In principle, the unit step function could be replaced by any function u (x) such that u (x) =0 if x [0,1] and ∫01 u (x) dx =1. Even different gates need not be based on the same profile u (x). The essential requirement, however, is that the control profiles are flexible enough to allow the constructions of Q′ and Q1/2 in Sec. 4.
65. W. Zhang, V. V. Dobrovitski, L. F. Santos, L. Viola, and B. N. Harmon, Phys. Rev. B 75, 201302 (R) (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.201302
66. W. Zhang, V. V. Dobrovitski, L. F. Santos, L. Viola, and B. N. Harmon, J. Mod. Opt. 54, 2629 (2007). 10.1080/09500340701534857
67. W. Zhang, N. P. Konstantinidis, V. V. Dobrovitski, B. N. Harmon, L. F. Santos, and L. Viola, Phys. Rev. B 77, 125336 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.125336
68. Realization-to-realization fluctuations in the improvement ratio and corresponding fidelities have been found to be more or less pronounced depending on parameter regime. In particular, the variations are largest for r1 and large A (yielding, e.g., up to a 20% relative variance over four different samples), whereas the effect of Γ seems far less important. These fluctuations do not in any case qualitatively alter the main observed features.
69. H. K. Cummins and J. A. Jones, New J. Phys. 2, 6 (2000). 10.1088/1367-2630/2/1/006
70. M. Hsieh and H. Rabitz, Phys. Rev. A 77, 042306 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.042306
71. J. E. Levy, A. Ganti, C. A. Phillips, B. R. Hamlet, A. J. Landahl, T. M. Gurrieri, R. D. Carr, and M. S. Carroll, e-print arXiv:0904.0003.