4.8 Article

Distributed Quantum Error Correction for Chip-Level Catastrophic Errors

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 129, 期 24, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.240502

关键词

-

资金

  1. ARO [W911NF-18-1-0020, W911NF-18-1-0212]
  2. ARO MURI [W911NF-16-1-0349, W911NF-21-1-0325]
  3. AFOSR MURI [FA9550-19-1-0399, FA9550-21-1-0209]
  4. AFRL [FA8649-21-P-0781]
  5. DoE Q-NEXT
  6. NSF [OMA-1936118, EEC-1941583, OMA-2137642]
  7. NTT Research, and the Packard Foundation [2020-71479]
  8. Chicago Prize Postdoctoral Fellowship in Theoretical Quantum Science
  9. JST Moonshot RD Grant [JPMJMS2061]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quantum error correction is crucial for scaling up quantum computers. In this study, a distributed error correction scheme is proposed to combat the devastating impact of cosmic ray events on quantum computers. The scheme introduces an additional layer of quantum erasure error correcting code across separate chips and has shown fault tolerant behavior against chip-level catastrophic errors. Experimental implementation using superconducting qubits with microwave links has been discussed, and the analysis suggests that the error rate can be suppressed from 1 per 10 s to less than 1 per month.
Quantum error correction holds the key to scaling up quantum computers. Cosmic ray events severely impact the operation of a quantum computer by causing chip-level catastrophic errors, essentially erasing the information encoded in a chip. Here, we present a distributed error correction scheme to combat the devastating effect of such events by introducing an additional layer of quantum erasure error correcting code across separate chips. We show that our scheme is fault tolerant against chip-level catastrophic errors and discuss its experimental implementation using superconducting qubits with microwave links. Our analysis shows that in state-of-the-art experiments, it is possible to suppress the rate of these errors from 1 per 10 s to less than 1 per month.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据