Theory of measurement crosstalk in superconducting phase qubits
A. G. Kofman, Q. Zhang, J. M. Martinis, A. N. Korotkov
arXiv:cond-mat/0606078 · DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.014524 · 2006-06-03
Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval
Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.
Abstract
We analyze the crosstalk error mechanism in measurement of two capacitively coupled superconducting flux-biased phase qubits. The damped oscillations of the superconducting phase after the measurement of the first qubit may significantly excite the second qubit, leading to its measurement error. The first qubit, which is highly excited after the measurement, is described classically. The second qubit is treated both classically and quantum-mechanically. The results of the analysis are used to find the upper limit for the coupling capacitance (thus limiting the frequency of two-qubit operations) for a given tolerable value of the measurement error probability.
Similar papers
Theoretical analysis of measurement crosstalk for coupled Josephson phase qubits
similarity 0.90Abraham G. Kofman et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Analysis of measurement errors for a superconducting phase qubit
similarity 0.88Qin Zhang et al. · 2006 · arXiv:cond-mat/0607385
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Quantitative evaluation of defect-models in superconducting phase qubits
similarity 0.88J. H. Cole et al. · 2010 · arXiv:1010.6037
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Topological superconductivity and Majorana states in low-dimensional systems
similarity 0.88V. V. Val'kov et al. · 2022 · arXiv:2205.10069
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Amplitude Spectroscopy of a Solid-State Artificial Atom
similarity 0.88David M. Berns et al. · 2008 · arXiv:0805.1552
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Density of states near a vortex core in ferromagnetic superconductors: Application to STM measurements
similarity 0.88Jacob Linder et al. · 2008 · arXiv:0808.0983
Source status unknown — claims are unverified