The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2021
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2111.10174
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Crosstalk analysis for simultaneously driven two-qubit gates in spin qubit arrays

Irina Heinz,
Guido Burkard

Abstract: One of the challenges when scaling up semiconductor-based quantum processors consists in the presence of crosstalk errors caused by control operations on neighboring qubits. In previous work, crosstalk in spin qubit arrays has been investigated for non-driven single qubits near individually driven quantum gates and for two simultaneously driven single-qubit gates. Nevertheless, simultaneous gates are not restricted to single-qubit operations but also include frequently used two-qubit gates such as the CNOT gat… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 38 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…errors occurring in the encoding, decoding and correction steps of the algorithm. These errors are caused by decoherence of the qubits, residual exchange between the qubits (see Supplementary Information section VI), cross talk [27,59] and imperfect two-qubit gates. When com-paring the results for the different input states of the data qubit, it becomes clear that for an input state |↓ of the data qubit the visibility is higher and the correction of the single-qubit errors is more successful.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…errors occurring in the encoding, decoding and correction steps of the algorithm. These errors are caused by decoherence of the qubits, residual exchange between the qubits (see Supplementary Information section VI), cross talk [27,59] and imperfect two-qubit gates. When com-paring the results for the different input states of the data qubit, it becomes clear that for an input state |↓ of the data qubit the visibility is higher and the correction of the single-qubit errors is more successful.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%