4.8 Article

Experimental Bayesian Quantum Phase Estimation on a Silicon Photonic Chip

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 118, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.100503

关键词

-

资金

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) [UF130574, EP/J017175/1, EP/K021931/1, EP/K033085/1]
  2. European Research Council (ERC) [608062, 641039]
  3. Photonic Integrated Compound Quantum Encoding (PICQUE)
  4. FP7 Action: Beyond the Barriers of Optical Integration (BBOI) [FP7-ICT-2013-C]
  5. Quantum Simulation on a Photonic Chip (QuChip)
  6. U. S. Army Research Office (ARO)
  7. Centre for Nanoscience and Quantum Information (NSQI)
  8. Royal Society
  9. Royal Academy of Engineering Chair in Emerging Technologies
  10. EPSRC Early Career Fellowship
  11. Toshiba Research Fellowship scheme
  12. Royal Society [UF130574] Funding Source: Royal Society
  13. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K033085/1, EP/J017175/1, EP/I035935/1, EP/K021931/1, EP/L024020/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  14. EPSRC [EP/K033085/1, EP/I035935/1, EP/J017175/1, EP/K021931/1, EP/L024020/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quantum phase estimation is a fundamental subroutine in many quantum algorithms, including Shor's factorization algorithm and quantum simulation. However, so far results have cast doubt on its practicability for near-term, nonfault tolerant, quantum devices. Here we report experimental results demonstrating that this intuition need not be true. We implement a recently proposed adaptive Bayesian approach to quantum phase estimation and use it to simulate molecular energies on a silicon quantum photonic device. The approach is verified to be well suited for prethreshold quantum processors by investigating its superior robustness to noise and decoherence compared to the iterative phase estimation algorithm. This shows a promising route to unlock the power of quantum phase estimation much sooner than previously believed.

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