A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays

Abstract

The ability to engineer parallel, programmable operations between desired qubits within a quantum processor is key for building scalable quantum information systems 1,2 . In most state-of-the-art approaches, qubits interact locally, constrained by the connectivity associated with their fixed spatial layout. Here we demonstrate a quantum processor with dynamic, non-local connectivity, in which entangled qubits are coherently transported in a highly parallel manner across two spatial dimensions, between layers of single- and two-qubit operations. Our approach makes use of neutral atom arrays trapped and transported by optical tweezers; hyperfine states are used for robust quantum information storage, and excitation into Rydberg states is used for entanglement generation 3–5 . We use this architecture to realize programmable generation of entangled graph states, such as cluster states and a seven-qubit Steane code state 6,7 . Furthermore, we shuttle entangled ancilla arrays to realize a surface code state with thirteen data and six ancillary qubits 8 and a toric code state on a torus with sixteen data and eight ancillary qubits 9 . Finally, we use this architecture to realize a hybrid analogue–digital evolution 2 and use it for measuring entanglement entropy in quantum simulations 10–12 , experimentally observing non-monotonic entanglement dynamics associated with quantum many-body scars 13,14 . Realizing a long-standing goal, these results provide a route towards scalable quantum processing and enable applications ranging from simulation to metrology.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 75

1. 1.

   Cirac JI, Zoller P. A scalable quantum computer with ions in an array of microtraps. Nature. 2000;404:579-581.

   Not in our library10.1038/35007021

2. 2.
   Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond · 2018

   Not checked
3. 3.

   Jaksch D, et al. Fast quantum gates for neutral atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000;85:2208-2211.

   Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.85.2208

4. 4.

   Urban E, et al. Observation of Rydberg blockade between two atoms. Nat. Phys. 2009;5:110-114.

   Not in our library10.1038/nphys1178

5. 5.

   Levine H, et al. Parallel implementation of high-fidelity multiqubit gates with neutral atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019;123:170503.

   Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.123.170503

6. 6.

   Nigg D, et al. Quantum computations on a topologically encoded qubit. Science. 2014;345:302-305.

   Not in our library10.1126/science.1253742

7. 7.
   Realization of Real-Time Fault-Tolerant Quantum Error Correction · 2021

   Not checked
8. 8.

   Satzinger KJ, et al. Realizing topologically ordered states on a quantum processor. Science. 2021;374:1237-1241.

   Not in our library10.1126/science.abi8378

9. 9.

   Kitaev AY. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons. Ann. Phys. 2003;303:2-30.

   Not in our library10.1016/s0003-4916(02)00018-0

10. 10.

    Daley AJ, Pichler H, Schachenmayer J, Zoller P. Measuring entanglement growth in quench dynamics of bosons in an optical lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012;109:020505.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.109.020505

11. 11.

    Islam R, et al. Measuring entanglement entropy in a quantum many-body system. Nature. 2015;528:77-83.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature15750

12. 12.

    Kaufman AM, et al. Quantum thermalization through entanglement in an isolated many-body system. Science. 2016;353:794-800.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aaf6725

13. 13.

    Bernien H, et al. Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator. Nature. 2017;551:579-584.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature24622

14. 14.

    Turner CJ, Michailidis AA, Abanin DA, Serbyn M, Papić Z. Weak ergodicity breaking from quantum many-body scars. Nat. Phys. 2018;14:745-749.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41567-018-0137-5

15. 15.

    Molmer K, Sorensen A. Multiparticle entanglement of hot trapped ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1999;82:1835.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.82.1835

16. 16.

    Wright K, et al. Benchmarking an 11-qubit quantum computer. Nat. Commun. 2019;10:5464.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41467-019-13534-2

17. 17.

    Periwal A, et al. Programmable interactions and emergent geometry in an array of atom clouds. Nature. 2021;600:630-635.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-04156-0

18. 18.

    Majer J, et al. Coupling superconducting qubits via a cavity bus. Nature. 2007;449:443-447.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature06184

19. 19.

    Mandel O, et al. Coherent transport of neutral atoms in spin-dependent optical lattice potentials. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2003;91:010407.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.91.010407

20. 20.

    Beugnon J, et al. Two-dimensional transport and transfer of a single atomic qubit in optical tweezers. Nat. Phys. 2007;3:696-699.

    Not in our library10.1038/nphys698

21. 21.

    Monroe C, et al. Large-scale modular quantum-computer architecture with atomic memory and photonic interconnects. Phys. Rev. A. 2014;89:022317.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.89.022317

22. 22.

    Wu T-Y, Kumar A, Giraldo F, Weiss DS. Stern–Gerlach detection of neutral-atom qubits in a state-dependent optical lattice. Nat. Phys. 2019;15:538-542.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41567-019-0478-8

23. 23.

    Pompili M, et al. Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits. Science. 2021;372:259-264.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.abg1919

24. 24.

    Pino JM, et al. Demonstration of the trapped-ion quantum CCD computer architecture. Nature. 2021;592:209-213.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03318-4

25. 25.

    Ebadi S, et al. Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator. Nature. 2021;595:227-232.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03582-4

26. 26.

    Levine, H. et al. Dispersive optics for scalable Raman driving of hyperfine qubits. Phys. Rev. A105, 032618 (2022).

    Not in our library

27. 27.

    Vandersypen LMK, Chuang IL. NMR techniques for quantum control and computation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2005;76:1037.

    Not in our library10.1103/revmodphys.76.1037

28. 28.

    Gullion T, Baker DB, Conradi MS. New, compensated Carr–Purcell sequences. J. Magn. Reson. 1990;89:479-484.

    Not in our library

29. 29.

    Dordević T, et al. Entanglement transport and a nanophotonic interface for atoms in optical tweezers. Science. 2021;373:1511-1514.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.abi9917

30. 30.

    Lam MR, et al. Demonstration of quantum brachistochrones between distant states of an atom. Phys. Rev. X. 2021;11:011035.

    Not in our library

31. 31.

    Hein, M. et al. Entanglement in graph states and its applications. In Proc. International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi” (eds Casati, G. et al.) Vol. 162, 115–218 (IOS Press, 2006).

    Not in our library

32. 32.

    Raussendorf R, Briegel HJ. A one-way quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001;86:5188.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.86.5188

33. 33.

    Schwartz I, et al. Deterministic generation of a cluster state of entangled photons. Science. 2016;354:434-437.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aah4758

34. 34.

    Tóth G, Gühne O. Entanglement detection in the stabilizer formalism. Phys. Rev. A. 2005;72:022340.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.72.022340

35. 35.

    Raussendorf R, Harrington J. Fault-tolerant quantum computation with high threshold in two dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007;98:190504.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.98.190504

36. 36.

    Gottesman, D. An introduction to quantum error correction and fault-tolerant quantum computation. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/0904.2557 (2009).

    Not in our library

37. 37.

    Egan L, et al. Fault-tolerant control of an error-corrected qubit. Nature. 2021;598:281-286.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03928-y

38. 38.

    Fowler AG, Mariantoni M, Martinis JM, Cleland AN. Surface codes: towards practical large-scale quantum computation. Phys. Rev. A. 2012;86:032324.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.86.032324

39. 39.

    Semeghini G, et al. Probing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simulator. Science. 2021;374:1242-1247.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.abi8794

40. 40.

    Bravyi S, Hastings MB, Verstraete F. Lieb–Robinson bounds and the generation of correlations and topological quantum order. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006;97:050401.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.97.050401

Cited by papers we hold 1

• Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays · 2023
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.