- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review A

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Fidelity relations in an array of neutral atom qubits: Experimental validation of control noise

D. A. Janse van Rensburg*, R. J. P. T. de Keijzer, R. C. Venderbosch, Y. van der Werf, J. J. del Pozo Mellado, R. S. Lous, E. J. D. Vredenbregt, and S. J. J. M. F. Kokkelmans

  • *Contact author: d.a.janse.van.rensburg@tue.nl
PDF

Phys. Rev. A 113, 022616 – Published 19 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/66zh-yt9d

Abstract

Noise is a hindering factor for current-era quantum computers. In this study, we experimentally validate the theoretical relationships between amplitude noise of the control signal and qubit state fidelity. The experiment comprises a 10×10 site optical tweezer array stochastically loaded with single rubidium-85 atoms. A global microwave field is used to manipulate the state of the hyperfine qubits. With precise control of the time-dependent amplitude of the microwave drive, we apply control signals featuring artificial noise. We systematically analyze the impact of various noise profiles on the fidelity distribution of the quantum states. The measured fidelities are compared against theoretical predictions made using the stochastic Schrödinger equation. Our results show a good agreement between the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted results. This validation is consequential, as the model provides critical information on noise identification and optimal control protocols in noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ)-era quantum systems.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (42)

  1. T. Ladd, F. Jelezko, R. Laflamma, Y. Nakamura, C. Monroe, and J. L. O'Brien, Quantum computers, Nature (London) 464, 45 (2010).
  2. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  3. D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Zhou, T. Manovitz, S. Ebadi, M. Cain, M. Kalinowski, D. Hangleiter, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, N. Maskara, I. Cong, X. Gao, P. Sales Rodriguez, T. Karolyshyn, G. Semeghini, M. J. Gullans, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, et al., Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays, Nature (London) 626, 58 (2024).
  4. G. Bornet, G. Emperauger, C. Chen, F. Machado, S. Chern, L. Leclerc, B. Gély, Y. T. Chew, D. Barredo, T. Lahaye, N. Y. Yao, and A. Browaeys, Enhancing a many-body dipolar Rydberg tweezer array with arbitrary local controls, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 263601 (2024).
  5. T. M. Graham, Y. Song, J. Scott, C. Poole, L. Phuttitarn, K. Jooya, P. Eichler, X. Jiang, A. Marra, B. Grinkemeyer, M. Kwon, M. Ebert, J. Cherek, M. T. Lichtman, M. Gillette, J. Gilbert, D. Bowman, T. Ballance, C. Campbell, E. D. Dahl, et al., Multi-qubit entanglement and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer, Nature (London) 604, 457 (2022).
  6. L.-M. Duan and G.-C. Guo, Suppressing environmental noise in quantum computation through pulse control, Phys. Lett. A 261, 139 (1999).
  7. D. Dong, C. Wu, C. Chen, B. Qi, I. R. Petersen, and F. Nori, Learning robust pulses for generating universal quantum gates, Sci. Rep. 6, 36090 (2016).
  8. D. Daems, A. Ruschhaupt, D. Sugny, and S. Guérin, Robust quantum control by a single-shot shaped pulse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 050404 (2013).
  9. M. Mohan, R. de Keijzer, and S. Kokkelmans, Robust control and optimal Rydberg states for neutral atom two-qubit gates, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033052 (2023).
  10. U. Güngördü and J. P. Kestner, Robust quantum gates using smooth pulses and physics-informed neural networks, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023155 (2022).
  11. L. S. Baker, S. A. Shah, A. Zlotnik, and A. Piryatinski, Robust quantum gate preparation in open environments, 2025 American Control Conference (ACC) (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2025), pp. 4872–4878.
  12. R. J. P. T. de Keijzer, L. Y. Visser, O. Tse, and S. J. J. M. F. Kokkelmans, Fidelity-enhanced variational quantum optimal control, Phys. Rev. A 111, 052625 (2025).
  13. I. Semina, V. Semin, F. Petruccione, and A. Barchielli, Stochastic Schrödinger equations for Markovian and non-Markovian cases, Open Sys. Inf. Dyn. 21, 1440008 (2014).
  14. R. J. P. T. de Keijzer, L. Y. Visser, O. Tse, and S. J. J. M. F. Kokkelmans, Qubit fidelity distribution under stochastic Schrödinger equations driven by classical noise, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 023063 (2025).
  15. K. Nieman, K. Kasturi Rangan, and H. Durand, Control implemented on quantum computers: Effects of noise, nondeterminism, and entanglement, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 61, 10133 (2022).
  16. S. Resch and U. R. Karpuzcu, Benchmarking quantum computers and the impact of quantum noise, ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 1 (2021).
  17. J. Emerson, R. Alicki, and K. Życzkowski, Scalable noise estimation with random unitary operators, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 7, S347 (2005).
  18. M. A. Fogarty, M. Veldhorst, R. Harper, C. H. Yang, S. D. Bartlett, S. T. Flammia, and A. S. Dzurak, Nonexponential fidelity decay in randomized benchmarking with low-frequency noise, Phys. Rev. A 92, 022326 (2015).
  19. E. Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle, J. Britton, R. B. Blakestad, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, S. Seidelin, and D. J. Wineland, Randomized benchmarking of quantum gates, Phys. Rev. A 77, 012307 (2008).
  20. J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. Tornberg, J. Koch, L. S. Bishop, A. A. Houck, B. R. Johnson, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Randomized benchmarking and process tomography for gate errors in a solid-state qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 090502 (2009).
  21. In this work, we choose to refrain from using standard bra-ket notation for readability purposes.
  22. O. D. Street and D. Crisan, Semi-martingale driven variational principles, Proc. R. Soc. A 477, 20200957 (2021).
  23. K. Ito and T. Hida, Stochastic Processes and Their Applications (Springer, New York, 2014).
  24. M. Moodley and F. Petruccione, Stochastic wave-function unraveling of the generalized Lindblad master equation, Phys. Rev. A 79, 042103 (2009).
  25. E. Vlachos, H. Zhang, V. Maurya, J. Marshall, T. Albash, and E. M. Levenson-Falk, Master equation emulation and coherence preservation with classical control of a superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. A 106, 062620 (2022).
  26. G. Di Bartolomeo, M. Vischi, F. Cesa, R. Wixinger, M. Grossi, S. Donadi, and A. Bassi, Noisy gates for simulating quantum computers, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043210 (2023).
  27. C. Tuchendler, A. M. Lance, A. Browaeys, Y. R. P. Sortais, and P. Grangier, Energy distribution and cooling of a single atom in an optical tweezer, Phys. Rev. A 78, 033425 (2008).
  28. S. Bourdeauducq, R. Jördens, P. Zotov, J. Britton, D. Slichter, D. Leibrandt, D. Allcock, A. Hankin, F. Kermarrec, Y. Sionneau, R. Srinivas, T. R. Tan, and J. Bohnet, ARTIQ 1.0 (1.0), Zenodo (2016), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.51303.
  29. E. F. Dierikx, A. E. Wallin, T. Fordell, J. Myyry, P. Koponen, M. Merimaa, T. J. Pinkert, J. C. J. Koelemeij, H. Z. Peek, and R. Smets, White Rabbit precision time protocol on long-distance fiber links, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 63, 945 (2016).
  30. T. O'Brien, B. Tarasinski, and L. DiCarlo, Density-matrix simulation of small surface codes under current and projected experimental noise, npj Quantum Inf. 3, 39 (2017).
  31. Y.-C. Chen, A tutorial on kernel density estimation and recent advances, Biostatistics and Epidemiology 1, 161 (2017).
  32. All data and code used are available publicly from https://gitlab.tue.nl/s1658271/sse/-/tree/03fc6db7ddb57cf0b115d159156ae36628a6d7fd/.
  33. N. Schlosser, G. Reymond, and P. Grangier, Collisional blockade in microscopic optical dipole traps, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 023005 (2002).
  34. I. Madjarov, Entangling, controlling, and detecting individual strontium atoms in optical tweezer arrays, Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology, 2021, available at https://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechTHESIS:01292021-001639979.
  35. H. K. Cummins, G. Llewellyn, and J. A. Jones, Tackling systematic errors in quantum logic gates with composite rotations, Phys. Rev. A 67, 042308 (2003).
  36. T. Xia, M. Lichtman, K. Maller, A. W. Carr, M. J. Piotrowicz, L. Isenhower, and M. Saffman, Randomized benchmarking of single-qubit gates in a 2D array of neutral-atom qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 100503 (2015).
  37. S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization, Berichte über verteilte messysteme No. dl. 1 (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 2004).
  38. B. Øksendal, Stochastic Differential Equations, Universitext (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010).
  39. R. A. Maller, G. Müller, and A. Szimayer, Ornstein–Uhlenbeck processes and extensions, in Handbook of Financial Time Series, edited by T. Mikosch, J. P. Kreiß, R. Davis, and T. Andersen (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009), pp. 421–437.
  40. M. Bayram, T. Partal, and G. Orucova Buyukoz, Numerical methods for simulation of stochastic differential equations, Adv. Differ. Equations 2018, 17 (2018).
  41. P. E. Kloeden and E. Platen, Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations (Springer, New York, 1999).
  42. H.-P. Breuer, U. Dorner, and F. Petruccione, Numerical integration methods for stochastic wave function equations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 132, 30 (2000).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 113, 022616– Published 19 February, 2026
  • Received 20 June 2025
  • Accepted 29 December 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation