Home | About Journal | Web Links | E-mail Alerts | RSS RSS Icon | Browse
EPAPS
PACS
  • 03.67.Lx
    Quantum computation architectures and implementations
  • 03.67.Ac
    Quantum algorithms, protocols and simulations
  • 03.67.Hk
    Quantum communication
  • 03.67.Pp
    Quantum error correction and other methods for protection against decoherence
  • YEAR: 2009
RELATED DATABASES

To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
PUBLICATION DATA
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef APS
Dave Bacon1,2 and Steven T. Flammia3
1Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA
2Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA
3Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 2Y5 Canada
The difficulty in producing precisely timed and controlled quantum gates is a significant source of error in many physical implementations of quantum computers. Here we introduce a simple universal primitive, adiabatic gate teleportation, which is robust to timing errors and many control errors and maintains a constant energy gap throughout the computation above a degenerate ground state space. This construction allows for geometric robustness based upon the control of two independent qubit interactions. Further, our piecewise adiabatic evolution easily relates to the quantum circuit model, enabling the use of standard methods from fault-tolerance theory for establishing thresholds. ©2009 The American Physical Society
History: Received 26 May 2009; published 18 September 2009
Permalink: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v103/e120504

REFERENCES (17)

For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. R. Raussendorf and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5188 (2001).
  2. A. M. Childs, E. Farhi, and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 65, 012322 (2001).
  3. C. H. Bennett et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993).
  4. G. Schaller, Phys. Rev. A 78, 032328 (2008).
  5. D. Kult, J. Åberg, and E. Sjöqvist, Phys. Rev. A 74, 022106 (2006).
  6. S. Jansen, M. B. Ruskai, and R. Seiler, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 48, 102111 (2007).
  7. G. Schaller, S. Mostame, and R. Schutzhold, Phys. Rev. A 73, 062307 (2006).
  8. S. D. Bartlett and T. Rudolph, Phys. Rev. A 74, 040302(R) (2006).
  9. O. Oreshkov, T. A. Brun, and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 070502 (2009).
  10. O. Oreshkov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 090502 (2009).
ADVERTISEMENT