The present systems, methods and apparatus generally relate to superconducting devices and particularly relate to active compensation of superconducting elements in a quantum processor.
There are many different hardware and software approaches under consideration for use in quantum computers. One hardware approach employs integrated circuits formed of superconducting material, such as aluminum and/or niobium, to define superconducting qubits. Superconducting qubits can be separated into several categories depending on the physical property used to encode information. For example, they may be separated into charge, flux and phase devices. Charge devices store and manipulate information in the charge states of the device; flux devices store and manipulate information in a variable related to the magnetic flux through some part of the device; and phase devices store and manipulate information in a variable related to the difference in superconducting phase between two regions of the phase device.
Many different forms of superconducting flux qubits have been implemented in the art, but all successful implementations generally include a superconducting loop (i.e., a “qubit loop”) that is interrupted by at least one Josephson junction. Some embodiments implement multiple superconducting loops connected in series and/or in parallel with one another. Some embodiments implement multiple Josephson junctions connected either in series or in parallel with one another. In the art, a pair of Josephson junctions that are connected in parallel with one another is known as a compound Josephson junction (“CJJ”). It is understood that the behavior of a CJJ may be modeled as a single effective Josephson junction, similar to the way in which the behavior of multiple resistors connected in parallel with one another may be modeled as a single effective resistance.
A computer processor may take the form of an analog processor, for instance a quantum processor such as a superconducting quantum processor. A superconducting quantum processor may include a number of qubits and associated local bias devices, for instance two or more superconducting qubits. Further detail and embodiments of exemplary quantum processors that may be used in conjunction with the present systems, methods, and apparatus are described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,533,068, US Patent Publication 2008-0176750, US Patent Publication 2009-0121215, and PCT Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/037984.
A variety of systems, methods and apparatus that enable active compensation of quantum processor elements are described.
At least one embodiment may be summarized as a circuit including a primary compound Josephson junction structure comprising two parallel current paths that are each formed of a material that is superconducting below a critical temperature, wherein each of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure includes a respective Josephson junction structure; and wherein the Josephson junction structure in a first one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure includes a first secondary compound Josephson junction structure comprising two parallel current paths that are each formed of a material that is superconducting below a critical temperature, and at least two Josephson junctions, each of which interrupts a respective one of the two parallel current paths of the first secondary compound Josephson junction structure. The circuit may include a programming interface that is configured to couple control signals to the primary compound Josephson junction structure and/or a programming interface that is configured to couple control signals to the first secondary compound Josephson junction structure. The Josephson junction structure in a second one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure may include a single Josephson junction that interrupts the second one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure. Alternatively, the Josephson junction structure in a second one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure may include a second secondary compound Josephson junction structure comprising two parallel current paths that are each formed of a material that is superconducting below a critical temperature, and at least two Josephson junctions, each of which interrupts a respective one of the two parallel current paths of the second secondary compound Josephson junction structure. In such embodiments, a programming interface may be configured to couple control signals to the second secondary compound Josephson junction structure.
At least one embodiment may be summarized as a superconducting qubit including a qubit loop formed by a first current path that is superconductive at or below a critical temperature; and a primary compound Josephson junction structure that interrupts the qubit loop, the primary compound Josephson junction structure comprising two parallel current paths that are each formed of a material that is superconducting below a critical temperature, wherein each of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure includes a respective Josephson junction structure; and wherein the Josephson junction structure in a first one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure includes a first secondary compound Josephson junction structure comprising two parallel current paths that are each formed of a material that is superconducting below a critical temperature, and at least two Josephson junctions, each of which interrupts a respective one of the two parallel current paths of the first secondary compound Josephson junction structure. The superconducting qubit may be a superconducting flux qubit. A programming interface may be configured to couple control signals to the qubit loop, and/or a programming interface may be configured to couple control signals to the primary compound Josephson junction structure, and/or a programming interface may be configured to couple control signals to the first secondary compound Josephson junction structure. The Josephson junction structure in a second one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure may include a single Josephson junction that interrupts the second one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure. Alternatively, the Josephson junction structure in a second one of the two parallel current paths of the primary compound Josephson junction structure may include a second secondary compound Josephson junction structure comprising two parallel current paths that are each formed of a material that is superconducting below a critical temperature, and at least two Josephson junctions, each of which interrupts a respective one of the two parallel current paths of the second secondary compound Josephson junction structure. A programming interface may be configured to couple control signals to the second secondary compound Josephson junction structure.
At least one embodiment may be summarized as a superconducting qubit including a qubit loop formed by a first superconducting current path; a first compound Josephson junction structure formed by a first pair of parallel superconducting current paths, wherein the first compound Josephson junction structure interrupts the qubit loop, and wherein each superconducting current path in the first pair of parallel superconducting current paths is interrupted by at least one Josephson junction; and a series LC-circuit coupled in parallel with the first compound Josephson junction structure through a superconducting current path, wherein the series LC-circuit realizes a tunable capacitance. The superconducting qubit may be a superconducting flux qubit. The series LC-circuit may include at least one capacitance and a second compound Josephson junction structure coupled in series with the at least one capacitance, the second compound Josephson junction structure formed by a second pair of parallel superconducting current paths, wherein each superconducting current path in the second pair of parallel superconducting current paths is interrupted by at least one Josephson junction. A programming interface may be configured to couple control signals to the second compound Josephson junction structure and thereby tune the capacitance of the LC-circuit.
At least one embodiment may be summarized as a qubit control system including a superconducting qubit comprising a qubit loop formed by a superconducting current path, wherein the qubit loop is interrupted by at least one Josephson junction structure; and a first tunable coupler that is configured to inductively couple to the qubit loop, wherein the inductance of the first tunable coupler is controlled by a programming interface that is configured to inductively couple control signals to the first tunable coupler, and wherein the first tunable coupler is not substantially coupled to any other qubit. The superconducting qubit may be a superconducting flux qubit. The qubit control system may further include at least one additional tunable coupler that is configured to inductively couple to the qubit loop, wherein the inductance of the at least one additional tunable coupler is controlled by a programming interface that is configured to inductively couple control signals to the at least one additional tunable coupler, and wherein the at least one additional tunable coupler is not substantially coupled to any other qubit.
At least one embodiment may be summarized as a qubit control system including a superconducting qubit comprising a qubit loop formed by a superconducting current path, wherein the qubit loop is interrupted by at least one Josephson junction structure; at least one L-tuner compound Josephson junction structure that interrupts the qubit loop; and a programming interface that is configured to inductively couple control signals to the L-tuner compound Josephson junction structure, thereby controlling the inductance of the qubit loop. The superconducting qubit may be a superconducting flux qubit.
At least one embodiment may be summarized as a quantum processor including a first qubit having a first characteristic associated with a parameter; a second qubit having a second characteristic associated with the parameter, wherein the first characteristic of the first qubit is different from the second characteristic of the second qubit; a coupling system selectively configurable to provide communicative coupling between the first qubit and the second qubit; and at least one device that is selectively operable to tune the parameter of the first qubit such that the first characteristic of the first qubit matches the second characteristic of the second qubit. In some embodiments, the parameter may be selected from the group consisting of inductance and capacitance.
In the drawings, identical reference numbers identify similar elements or acts. The sizes and relative positions of elements in the drawings are not necessarily drawn to scale. For example, the shapes of various elements and angles are not drawn to scale, and some of these elements are arbitrarily enlarged and positioned to improve drawing legibility. Further, the particular shapes of the elements as drawn are not intended to convey any information regarding the actual shape of the particular elements, and have been solely selected for ease of recognition in the drawings.
In the following description, some specific details are included to provide a thorough understanding of various disclosed embodiments. One skilled in the relevant art, however, will recognize that embodiments may be practiced without one or more of these specific details, or with other methods, components, materials, etc. In other instances, well-known structures associated with quantum processors, such as quantum devices, coupling devices, and control systems including microprocessors and drive circuitry have not been shown or described in detail to avoid unnecessarily obscuring descriptions of the embodiments of the present systems, methods and apparatus. Throughout this specification and the appended claims, the words “element” and “elements” are used to encompass, but are not limited to, all such structures, systems and devices associated with quantum processors, as well as their related programmable parameters.
Unless the context requires otherwise, throughout the specification and claims which follow, the word “comprise” and variations thereof, such as, “comprises” and “comprising” are to be construed in an open, inclusive sense, that is as “including, but not limited to.”
Reference throughout this specification to “one embodiment,” or “an embodiment,” or “another embodiment” means that a particular referent feature, structure, or characteristic described in connection with the embodiment is included in at least one embodiment. Thus, the appearances of the phrases “in one embodiment,” or “in an embodiment,” or “another embodiment” in various places throughout this specification are not necessarily all referring to the same embodiment. Furthermore, the particular features, structures, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments.
It should be noted that, as used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referents unless the content clearly dictates otherwise. Thus, for example, reference to a problem-solving system including “a quantum processor” includes a single quantum processor, or two or more quantum processors. It should also be noted that the term “or” is generally employed in its sense including “and/or” unless the content clearly dictates otherwise.
The headings provided herein are for convenience only and do not interpret the scope or meaning of the embodiments.
The various embodiments described herein provide mechanisms that enable active compensation for unwanted discrepancies in the elements of a superconducting quantum processor. A superconducting quantum processor is a physical device that is fabricated by physical means (e.g., lithography, etching, depositing or depositioning, masking, chemical-mechanical planarization, etc.), and these fabrication processes may be imperfect. Unwanted discrepancies in the elements of a superconducting quantum processor can result, for example, from variations in any of these fabrication processes producing slight variations in the exact composition and construction of the various constituent devices (e.g., Josephson junctions, qubits, couplers, etc.). These discrepancies can influence the behavior of these devices and how they interact with one another. For example, if there is a discrepancy between the sizes of two Josephson junctions then there may be a discrepancy in the behavior and characteristic parameters of the two Josephson junctions. In some instances, for example in compound Josephson junctions (“CJJs”), it may be desirable to align the properties (e.g., critical currents) of two Josephson junctions to provide a particular behavior. A CJJ in which the behavior of two Josephson junctions differ due to a fabrication variation is said to exhibit “Josephson junction asymmetry.” One aspect of the present systems, methods and apparatus provides a mechanism for actively compensating for Josephson junction asymmetry in the elements (e.g., qubits) of a superconducting quantum processor.
In some applications, it may be advantageous to enable additional control of the behavior of the at least two Josephson junction structures in the primary CJJ structure of a qubit.
Those of skill in the art will appreciate that the systems, methods and apparatus for actively compensating for Josephson junction asymmetry described herein and illustrated in the embodiments of
It is typically desired that all of the qubits in a quantum processor behave substantially identically to one another. Thus, while the implementation of secondary CJJ structures within primary CJJ structures as described in
Those of skill in the art will appreciate that the use of at least one secondary CJJ structure acting as an effective Josephson junction within a primary CJJ structure for the purpose of compensating for Josephson junction asymmetry may be incorporated into any application of CJJ structures and is not limited to use in superconducting qubits or quantum computation in general.
In addition to Josephson junction asymmetry, the total qubit capacitance is another parameter that is susceptible to unwanted discrepancies due to fabrication variations. The single qubit tunnel splitting Δi realized in each particular qubit is typically sensitive to the qubit capacitance, which can vary from one qubit to the next due to fabrication variations. Accordingly, a further aspect of the present systems, methods and apparatus provides a mechanism for actively compensating for discrepancies in the qubit capacitance of each qubit (or a subset of qubits) in a quantum processor by implementing a tunable capacitance. In an embodiment, this is achieved at the qubit level by coupling a series LC circuit in parallel with the CJJ structure (e.g., the primary CJJ structure) of the qubit, where the L (i.e., the inductance) is itself embodied by a tunable CJJ structure.
Those of skill in the art will appreciate that the systems, methods and apparatus for tuning qubit capacitance described herein and illustrated in the embodiment of
Qubit inductance is another parameter which may undesirably vary from qubit to qubit as a result of fabrication variations. Furthermore, the inductance of each qubit may depend, at least in part, on the programmed configuration of the quantum processor, and these inductances can change as the configuration of the quantum processor is reprogrammed. Accordingly, a further aspect of the present systems, methods and apparatus provides a mechanism for actively compensating for discrepancies in the qubit inductance of each qubit (or a subset of qubits) in a quantum processor. In one embodiment, this may be achieved by introducing at least one dedicated tunable coupler that couples to the qubit (e.g., to the qubit loop) and which may be tuned to compensate for any changes and/or discrepancies in the qubit inductance. In another embodiment, this may be achieved by introducing at least one CJJ structure (referred to hereinafter as an “L-tuner CJJ structure”) in the qubit loop, where the Josephson inductance of the at least one L-tuner CJJ structure can be tuned to compensate for any changes and/or discrepancies in the qubit inductance. The ability of a Josephson device to tune inductance is described in M. J. Feldman, “The Josephson Junction as a Variable Inductance Tuner”, Extended Abstracts of the Fourth International Superconductive Electronics Conference, pp 32-33, August 1993.
Alternatively,
Those of skill in the art will appreciate that the systems, methods and apparatus for tuning qubit inductance described herein and illustrated in the embodiments of
Those of skill in the art will appreciate that the various embodiments described herein providing various forms of active compensation of quantum processor elements may be combined in various ways into a single system. For example, a system may incorporate all or any combination of the mechanisms for tuning Josephson junction asymmetry, qubit capacitance, and qubit inductance. That is, a single qubit may include all or any combination of the mechanisms described in the present systems, methods and apparatus.
Those of skill in the art will appreciate that the present systems, methods and apparatus may be generally applied to any implementation of a quantum processor and are not limited to superconducting implementations. Due to inherent parametric discrepancies between real physical devices, most quantum computing systems while exhibit unwanted parametric discrepancies between qubits. In accordance with the various embodiments described herein, the negative effects of such discrepancies may be mitigated by implementing a quantum processor comprising: a first qubit having a first characteristic associated with a parameter; a second qubit having a second characteristic associated with the parameter, wherein the first characteristic of the first qubit is different from the second characteristic of the second qubit; a coupling system selectively configurable to provide communicative coupling between the first qubit and the second qubit; and at least one device that is selectively operable to tune the parameter of the first qubit such that the first characteristic of the first qubit matches the second characteristic of the second qubit.
According to the present state of the art, a superconducting material may generally only act as a superconductor if it is cooled below a critical temperature that is characteristic of the specific material in question. Throughout this specification and the appended claims, the term “superconducting” when used to describe a physical structure such as a “superconducting loop” is used to indicate a material that is capable of behaving as a superconductor at an appropriate temperature (i.e., below a critical temperature). A superconducting material may not necessarily be acting as a superconductor at all times in all embodiments of the present systems, methods and apparatus.
The above description of illustrated embodiments, including what is described in the Abstract, is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the embodiments to the precise forms disclosed. Although specific embodiments of and examples are described herein for illustrative purposes, various equivalent modifications can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure, as will be recognized by those skilled in the relevant art. The teachings provided herein of the various embodiments can be applied to other systems, methods and apparatus of quantum computation, not necessarily the exemplary systems, methods and apparatus for quantum computation generally described above.
The various embodiments described above can be combined to provide further embodiments. All of the US patents, US patent application publications, US patent applications, foreign patents, foreign patent applications and non-patent publications referred to in this specification and/or listed in the Application Data Sheet, including but not limited to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/094,002, filed Sep. 3, 2008 and entitled “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements”; U.S. Pat. No. 7,533,068; US Patent Publication 2008-0176750; US Patent Publication 2009-0121215; PCT Patent Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/037984, US Patent Publication 2008-0215850; PCT Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/044537, PCT Application Serial No. PCT/US2009/055939, US Patent Publication 2006-0147154; US Patent Publication 2008-0238531; and US Patent Publication 2008-0274898 are incorporated herein by reference, in their entirety. Aspects of the embodiments can be modified, if necessary, to employ systems, circuits and concepts of the various patents, applications and publications to provide yet further embodiments.
These and other changes can be made to the embodiments in light of the above-detailed description. In general, in the following claims, the terms used should not be construed to limit the claims to the specific embodiments disclosed in the specification and the claims, but should be construed to include all possible embodiments along with the full scope of equivalents to which such claims are entitled. Accordingly, the claims are not limited by the disclosure.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4370359 | Fetter et al. | Jan 1983 | A |
4947118 | Fujimaki | Aug 1990 | A |
6472681 | Kane | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6608581 | Semenov | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6670630 | Blais et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6838694 | Esteve et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6900454 | Blais et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6930318 | Vion et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6943368 | Amin et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6984846 | Newns et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7135701 | Amin et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7268576 | Amin | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7307275 | Lidar et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7335909 | Amin et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7418283 | Amin | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7498832 | Baumgardner et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7533068 | Maassen et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7605600 | Harris | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7619437 | Thom et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7639035 | Berkley | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7876248 | Berkley et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7898282 | Harris et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8008942 | Van et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8035540 | Berkley et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8063657 | Rose | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8169231 | Berkley | May 2012 | B2 |
8190548 | Choi | May 2012 | B2 |
8195596 | Rose et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8244650 | Rose | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8283943 | Van Den Brink et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8421053 | Bunyk et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8536566 | Johansson et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
9015215 | Berkley et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9129224 | Lanting et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9152923 | Harris et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9178154 | Bunyk | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9547826 | King | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9806711 | Abdo | Oct 2017 | B1 |
10002107 | Lanting | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10290798 | Harris et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
10769545 | Amin et al. | Sep 2020 | B2 |
11038095 | Huang et al. | Jun 2021 | B2 |
11127893 | Johnson et al. | Sep 2021 | B2 |
20030121028 | Coury et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20040012407 | Amin et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040077503 | Blais et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040238813 | Lidar | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050078022 | Hirano et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050082519 | Amin et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050250651 | Amin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060097747 | Amin | May 2006 | A1 |
20060147154 | Thom et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060225165 | Maassen et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070180586 | Amin | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070239366 | Hilton et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080176750 | Rose et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080215850 | Berkley et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080238531 | Harris | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080260257 | Rose | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080274898 | Johnson et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090033369 | Baumgardner et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090078932 | Amin | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090121215 | Choi | May 2009 | A1 |
20090289638 | Farinelli et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20120023053 | Harris et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120144159 | Pesetski et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130117200 | Thom | May 2013 | A1 |
20150032991 | Lanting et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20160071021 | Raymond | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160314407 | Bunyk et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20180151430 | Kirby et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
20180218279 | Lechner et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20190296211 | Chow et al. | Sep 2019 | A1 |
20190296212 | Rosenblatt et al. | Sep 2019 | A1 |
20190392878 | Murduck et al. | Dec 2019 | A1 |
20200090738 | Naaman et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
20200144476 | Huang et al. | May 2020 | A1 |
20200342548 | Mazed et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
20200411937 | Whittaker et al. | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210013391 | Johnson et al. | Jan 2021 | A1 |
20210073667 | Harris | Mar 2021 | A1 |
20220123048 | Swenson et al. | Apr 2022 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
7-198816 | Aug 1995 | JP |
9-33626 | Feb 1997 | JP |
9-83027 | Mar 1997 | JP |
H104223 | Jan 1998 | JP |
539333 | Dec 1976 | SU |
2005024716 | Mar 2005 | WO |
2006066415 | Jun 2006 | WO |
2008083498 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2008089559 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2009114805 | Sep 2009 | WO |
2009120638 | Oct 2009 | WO |
2009143166 | Nov 2009 | WO |
2010028183 | Mar 2010 | WO |
2012064974 | May 2012 | WO |
2015013441 | Jan 2015 | WO |
2016029172 | Feb 2016 | WO |
2017214331 | Dec 2017 | WO |
2019126396 | Jun 2019 | WO |
2020168097 | Aug 2020 | WO |
2023004040 | Jan 2023 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Whittaker, J.D. et al., “A Frequency and Sensitivity Tunable Microresonator Array for High-Speed Quantum Processor Readout,” arXiv:1509.05811v2 [quant-ph], Apr. 22, 2016, 8 pages. |
Ficheux, et al., “Fast Logic with Slow Qubits: Microwave-Activated Controlled-Z Gate on Low-Frequency Fluxoniums”, Physical Review X 11, 021026 (2021), 16 pages. |
Harris, et al., “Compound Josephson-junction coupler for flux qubits with minimal crosstalk”, Phys. Rev. B 80, 052506—Published Aug. 20, 2009, 4 pages. |
Hazard, et al., “Nanowire Superinductance Fluxonium Qubit”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 010504—Published Jan. 10, 2019,. |
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/387,654, dated Sep. 27, 2022, 8 pages,. |
Zhang, et al., “Universal Fast-Flux Control of a Coherent, Low-Frequency Qubit”, Physical Review X 11, 011010 (2021). 13 pages. |
English Translation of Chinese Notification of the First Office Action, for corresponding Chinese Application No. 200980141676.X, dated Jul. 16, 2012, 7 pages. |
European Search Report, dated Jun. 25, 2014, for corresponding European Application No. 09812240.1, 11 pages. |
Feldman, “The Josephson Junction as a Variable Inductance Tuner,” Extended Abstracts of the Fourth International Superconductive electronics Conference, pp. 32-33, Aug. 1993. No Copy Available. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Amendment filed Apr. 24, 2018, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/438,296, 11 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Amendment filed Dec. 4, 2018, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/438,296, 9 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Amendment filed Jan. 8, 2015, for U.S. Appl. No. 13/958,339, 15 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Amendment filed Oct. 25, 2018, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/438,296, 16 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Office Action dated Feb. 23, 2018, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/438,296, 9 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Office Action dated Jul. 26, 2018, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/438,296, 12 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Office Action dated Oct. 14, 2014, for U.S. Appl. No. 13/958,339, 11 pages. |
Harris et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” U.S. Appl. No. 61/094,002, filed Sep. 3, 2008, 58 pages. |
International Search Report, dated May 6, 2010, for PCT/US2009/055939, 3 pages. |
Johansson et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Amendment filed Apr. 8, 2013, for U.S. Appl. No. 12/991,891, 17 pages. |
Johansson et al., “Systems, Methods and Apparatus for Active Compensation of Quantum Processor Elements,” Office Action dated Jan. 11, 2013, for U.S. Appl. No. 12/991,891, 8 pages. |
Written Opinion, dated May 6, 2010, for PCT/US2009/055939, 3 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2022/037457, dated Jul. 14, 2023, 13 pages. |
Kerman et al., “Quantum Enhanced Optimization: Experimental Study Overview”, IARPA, Oct. 26, 2015. |
Nguyen et al., “High-coherence Fluxonium Qubit”, Physical Review X9, 041041, 2019. |
Paauw, Spectroscopy Experiments On Two Coupled Josephson Persistent Current Qubits, 2002. |
Pashkin et al., “Quantum Oscillations in Two Coupled Charge Qubits,” Nature 421:823-826, Feb. 20, 2003. |
Plourde et al., “Entangling Flux Qubits with a Bipolar Dynamic Inductance,” Physical Review B 70, arXiv:quant-ph/0406049v1, Jun. 8, 2004, 4 pages. |
Rocchetto et al., “Stabilisers as a design tool for new forms of Lechner-Hauke-Zoller Annealer”, arXiv:1603.08554 [quant-ph], May 2, 2016. https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.08554. |
Steffen et al., “Quantum computing: An IBM perspective”, IBM Journal of Research and Development, Sep./Oct. 2011. |
Suzuki et al., “Quantum Annealing of the Random-Field Ising Model Transverse Ferromagnetic Interactions,” arXiv:quant-ph/0702214v1, 6 pages, 2007. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2022/037877 dated Nov. 7, 2022, 8 pages. |
Mizuta, et al., “Quantum and Tunnelling Capacitance in Charge and Spin Qubits”, arXiv:1604.02884v2 [cond-mat.mes-hall] Aug. 16, 2016, 9 pages. |
Harris, et al., “Probing Noise in Flux Qubits via Macroscopic Resonant Tunneling,” arXiv:0712.0838 [cond-mat.mes-hall], 2008, pp. 1-4. |
Toffe et al., “Environmentally decoupled sds-Wave Josephson junctions for quantum computing”, Nature 398, pp. 679-681 (1999). |
Martinis, “Superconducting phase qubits,” Quantum Inf Process 8:81-103, 2009. |
Amin et al., “Josephson-phase qubit without tunneling”, Physical Review B, Mar. 5, 2003. |
Amin et al., Macroscopic Resonant Tunneling in the Presence of Low Frequency Noise, arXiv:0712.0845 [cond-mat.mes-hall], May 13, 2008, pp. 1-4. |
Amin, “Charge-Phase Qubit in Phase Regime”, arXiv:cond-mat/0311220, Nov. 10, 2003. |
Amin, “Flux qubit in charge-phase regime”, Physical Review B 71, Jan. 6, 2005. |
Amin, “Quantum nondemolition charge measurement of a Josephson qubit”, Physical Review B 71, Apr. 19, 2005. |
Averin, “Quantum nondemolition measurements of a qubit”, arXiv:cond-mat/0202082, Feb. 6, 2002. |
Bao et al., “Fluxonium: an alternative qubit platform for high-fidelity operations”, arXiv:2111.13504, Nov. 16, 2021. |
Berkley, “A Josephson Junction Qubit”, Dissertation University of Maryland, 2003. |
Berkley, A.J. et al., “Tunneling Spectroscopy Using a Probe Qubit,” arXiv:1210.6310v2 [cond-mat.supr-con], Jan. 3, 2013, 5 pages. |
Bladh et al., “Reading out Charge Qubits with a Radio Frequency Single Electron Transistor”, Physica Scripta, 2002. |
Blatter et al., “Design aspects of superconducting-phase quantum bits,” Physical Review B 63: 174511-1-174511-9, 2001. |
Bocko et al., “Prospects for Quantum Coherent Computation Using Superconducting Electronics,” IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 7(2):3638-3641, Jun. 1997. |
Braginsky et al., “Quantum nondemolition measurements: the route from toys to tools”, Review of Modern Physics 68, Jan. 1, 1996. |
Caves et al., “On the measurement of a weak classical force coupled to a quantum-mechanical oscillator. I. Issues of principle”, Reviews of Modern Physics 52, Apr. 1, 1980. |
Clarke et al., “Superconducting quantum bits,” Nature 453:1031-1042, Jun. 19, 2008. |
Cottet, “Implementation of a quantum bit in a superconducting circuit”, Thesis University of Paris, Sep. 30, 2002. |
Deutsch, “Quantum theory, the Church-Turing principle and the universal quantum computer,” Appeared in Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 400: 97-117, 1985. |
Devoret et al., “Amplifying quantum signals with the single-electron transistor”, Insight review articles, Aug. 31, 2000. |
Devoret et al., “Superconducting Circuits for Quantum Information: An Outlook,” Science 339:1169-1174, Mar. 8, 2013. |
Devoret et al., “Superconducting Qubits: A Short Review,” arXiv:cond-mat/0411174v1, Nov. 7, 2004, 41 pages. |
Dolan, “Offset masks for lift-off photoprocessing”, Applied Physics Letters, Aug. 26, 2008. https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.89690. |
Duty et al., “Coherent Dynamics of a Josephson Charge Qubit,” Physical Review B 69(140503(R)):1-4, 2004. |
Farhi et al., “Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithms versus Simulated Annealing.” MIT-CTP #3228, arXiv:quant-ph/0201031 v1. pp. 1-16, Jan. 8, 2002. |
Feynman, “Simulating Physics with Computers,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics 21(6/7): 467-488, 1982. |
Friedman et al., “Quantum superposition of distinct macroscopic states.” Nature 406:43-46, Jul. 6, 2000. |
Fulton et al., “Observation of Single-Electron Charging Effects in Small Tunnel Junctions”, Physical Review Letters, Jul. 6, 1987. |
Geerlings, “Improving Coherence of Superconducting Qubits and Resonators”, A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Yale University, Aug. 19, 2013. |
Grangier, “Quantum non-demolition measurements in optics”, Nature, Dec. 10, 1998. |
Guillaume et al., “Free evolution of superposition states in a single Cooper pair box”, Physical Review B 69, Dec. 19, 2003. |
Harris et al., “Sign and Magnitude Tunable Coupler for Superconducting Flux Qubits,” arXiv:cond-mat/0608253v1 [cond-mat.supr-con], Aug. 11, 2006. 5 pages. |
Harris et al., “Experimental Demonstration of a Robust and Scalable Flux Qubit,” arXiv:0909.4321v1, Sep. 24, 2009, 20 pages. |
Harris et al., “Experimental Investigation of an Eight-Qubit Unit Cell in a Superconducting Optimization Processor,” arXiv:1004.1628v2, Jun. 28, 2010, 16 pages. |
Harris, et al., “Probing Noise in Flux Qubits via Macroscopic Resonant Tunneling,” arXiv:0712.0836 [cond-mat.mes-hall], 2008, pp. 1-4. |
Hazard et al., “Nanowire-Superinductance Fluxonium Qubit”, arXiv:1805.00938v2, Jan. 29, 2019. |
Hormozi et al., “Nonstoquastic Hamiltonians and Quantum Annealing of an Ising Spin Glass,” arXiv:1609.06558v2 [quant-ph], May 15, 2017, 9 pages. |
Il'ichev et al., “Continuous Monitoring of Rabi Oscillations in a Josephson Flux Qubit,” Physical Review Letters 91(9): 097906-1-097906-4, week ending Aug. 29, 2003. |
Ioffe et al., “Environmentally decoupled sds-Wave Josephson junctions for quantum computing”, Nature 398, pp. 679-681 (1999). |
Jordan et al., “Quantum Nondemolition Measurement of a Kicked Qubit”, arXiv:cond-mat/0406529, Jun. 22, 2004. |
Kjaergaard et al., “Superconducting Qubits: Current State of Play”, arXiv: 1905.13641v1, May 31, 2019. |
Korotkov et al., “Continuous weak measurement of quantum coherent oscillations”, Physical Review B 64, Feb. 14, 2000. |
Boxio , et al., Computational Role of Multiqubit Tunneling in a Quantum Annealer, arXiv:1502.05754v1 [quant-ph], Feb. 20, 2015, pp. 1-7. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220020913 A1 | Jan 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61094002 | Sep 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12991891 | US | |
Child | 13958339 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 16380751 | Apr 2019 | US |
Child | 17330037 | US | |
Parent | 15438296 | Feb 2017 | US |
Child | 16380751 | US | |
Parent | 14846334 | Sep 2015 | US |
Child | 15438296 | US | |
Parent | 13958339 | Aug 2013 | US |
Child | 14846334 | US |