| Literature DB >> 27827422 |
Yi-Hao Kang1, Ye-Hong Chen1, Qi-Cheng Wu1, Bi-Hua Huang1, Jie Song2, Yan Xia1.
Abstract
In this paper, we present a protocol to generate a W state of three superconducting qubits (SQs) by using multiple Schrödinger dynamics. The three SQs are respective embedded in three different coplanar waveguide resonators (CPWRs), which are coupled to a superconducting coupler (SCC) qubit at the center of the setups. With the multiple Schrödinger dynamics, we build a shortcuts to adiabaticity (STA), which greatly accelerates the evolution of the system. The Rabi frequencies of the laser pulses being designed can be expressed by the superpositions of Gaussian functions via the curves fitting, so that they can be realized easily in experiments. What is more, numerical simulation result shows that the protocol is robust against control parameters variations and decoherence mechanisms, such as the dissipations from the CPWRs and the energy relaxation. In addition, the influences of the dephasing are also resisted on account of the accelerating for the dynamics. Thus, the performance of the protocol is much better than that with the conventional adiabatic passage techniques when the dephasing is taken into account. We hope the protocol could be implemented easily in experiments with current technology.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27827422 PMCID: PMC5101495 DOI: 10.1038/srep36737
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Schematic diagram of three CPWRs and a SCC qubit (a circle at the center). (b) The energy-level structure of SQ.
Figure 2(a) Comparison between and (versus t/T). (b) Comparison between and (versus t/T).
Figure 3The final fidelity F(T) versus λ.
Figure 4(a) The fidelity F(t) versus t/T. (b) The population P of versus t/T.
Figure 5The fidelities of the target state |W〉 versus t/T with different methods.
Figure 6(a) The final fidelity F(T) versus and γ/λ. (b) The final fidelity F(T) versus and . (c) The final fidelity F(T) versus γ/λ and .
Samples of the final fidelities F(T) with corresponding , γ/λ and .
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.9325 |
| 1 | 1 | 0.8 | 0.9418 |
| 1 | 0.8 | 1 | 0.9356 |
| 0.8 | 1 | 1 | 0.9328 |
| 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.9453 |
| 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.9596 |
| 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.9502 |
| 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.9458 |
| 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.9651 |
| 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.9749 |
| 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.9684 |
| 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.9654 |
| 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.9786 |
| 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.9887 |
| 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.9820 |
| 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.9790 |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.9924 |
Figure 7(a) The final fidelity F(T′) versus δT/T and δλ/λ. (b) The final fidelity F(T′) versus δT/T and . (c) The final fidelity F(T) versus and δλ/λ.
Figure 8Schematic diagram of a charge qubit.