Physical Review Letters · 2016 · 47 citations · 38 references
ComputingPhysicsQuantum ComputingQuantum MechanicsUncertainty QuantificationQuantum BitsQuantum ComputationQuantum ControlQuantum MeasurementQuantum StatesQuantum BenchmarkingQuantum Optimal ControlQubit CalibrationQubit CoherenceQubit Control PulsesRandomized BenchmarkingRobust Quantum Control
To exploit a given physical system for quantum information processing, it is critical to understand the different types of noise affecting quantum control. Distinguishing coherent and incoherent errors is extremely useful as they can be reduced in different ways. Coherent errors are generally easier to reduce at the hardware level, e.g., by improving calibration, whereas some sources of incoherent errors, e.g., T_{2}^{*} processes, can be reduced by engineering robust pulses. In this work, we illustrate how purity benchmarking and randomized benchmarking can be used together to distinguish between coherent and incoherent errors and to quantify the reduction in both of them due to using optimal control pulses and accounting for the transfer function in an electron spin resonance system. We also prove that purity benchmarking provides bounds on the optimal fidelity and diamond norm that can be achieved by correcting the coherent errors through improving calibration.
38
Theory of quantum error-correcting codes
Emanuel Knill, Raymond Laflamme · Physical Review A · 1997 · 1.6K citations
Computing, Computer Science, Physics +15
Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices
Emanuel Knill · Nature · 2005 · 1.2K citations · Full text
Computing, Computer Science, Physics +12
Randomized benchmarking of quantum gates
Emanuel Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle et al. · Physical Review A · 2008 · 1K citations · Full text
Computing, Computer Science, Physics +16