- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Globally driven superconducting quantum computing architecture

Roberto Menta1,2,*,†, Francesco Cioni2,*,‡, Riccardo Aiudi1, Marco Polini1,3, and Vittorio Giovannetti1,2

  • *These authors contributed equally to this work.
  • †Contact author: rmenta@planckian.co.
  • ‡Contact author: francesco.cioni@sns.it.
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 7, L012065 – Published 12 March, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L012065

Abstract

We propose a platform for implementing a universal, globally driven quantum computer based on a 2D ladder hosting three different species of superconducting qubits. In stark contrast with the existing literature, our scheme exploits the always-on longitudinal ZZ coupling. The latter, combined with specific driving frequencies, enables the reach of a blockade regime, which plays a pivotal role in the computing scheme.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (60)

  1. J. M. Gambetta, J. M. Chow, and M. Steffen, Building logical qubits in a superconducting quantum computing system, npj Quantum Inf. 3, 2 (2017).
  2. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature (London) 574, 505 (2019).
  3. M. Kjaergaard, M. E. Schwartz, J. Braumüller, P. Krantz, J. I. J. Wang, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Superconducting qubits: Current state of play, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 11, 369 (2020).
  4. A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025005 (2021).
  5. Y. Wu, W.-S. Bao, S. Cao, F. Chen, M.-C. Chen, X. Chen, T.-H. Chung, H. Deng, Y. Du, D. Fan et al., Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 180501 (2021).
  6. S. Bravyi, O. Dial, J. M. Gambetta, D. Gil, and Z. Nazario, The future of quantum computing with superconducting qubits, J. Appl. Phys. 132, 160902 (2022).
  7. O. Ezratty, Perspective on superconducting qubit quantum computing, Eur. Phys. J. A 59, 94 (2023).
  8. J. Q. You and F. Nori, Superconducting circuits and quantum information, Phys. Today 58 (11), 42 (2005).
  9. R. J. Schoelkopf and S. M. Girvin, Wiring up quantum systems, Nature (London) 451, 664 (2008).
  10. M. H. Devoret and R. J. Schoelkopf, Superconducting circuits for quantum information: An outlook, Science 339, 1169 (2013).
  11. G. Wendin, Quantum information processing with superconducting circuits: A review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 106001 (2017).
  12. H. Mukai, K. Sakata, S. J. Devitt, R. Wang, Y. Zhou, Y. Nakajima, and J.-S. Tsai, Pseudo-2D superconducting quantum computing circuit for the surface code: Proposal and preliminary tests, New J. Phys. 22, 043013 (2020).
  13. S. Kwon, A. Tomonaga, G. L. Bhai, S. J. Devitt, and J.-S. Tsai, Gate-based superconducting quantum computing, J. Appl. Phys. 129, 041102 (2021).
  14. E. J. Zhang, S. Srinivasan, N. Sundaresan, D. F. Bogorin, Y. Martin, J. B. Hertzberg, J. Timmerwilke, E. J. Pritchett, J.-B. Yau, C. Wang et al., High-performance superconducting quantum processors via laser annealing of transmon qubits, Sci. Adv. 8, eabi6690 (2022).
  15. Z. Li, P. Liu, P. Zhao, Z. Mi, H. Xu, X. Liang, T. Su, W. Sun, G. Xue, J.-N. Zhang et al., Error per single-qubit gate below 10−4 in a superconducting qubit, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 111 (2023).
  16. A. Somoroff, Q. Ficheux, R. A. Mencia, H. Xiong, R. Kuzmin, and V. E. Manucharyan, Millisecond coherence in a superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 267001 (2023).
  17. R. Barends et al., Diabatic gates for frequency-tunable superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 210501 (2019).
  18. B. Foxen, C. Neill, A. Dunsworth, P. Roushan, B. Chiaro, A. Megrant, J. Kelly, Z. Chen, K. Satzinger et al. (Google AI Quantum), Demonstrating a continuous set of two-qubit gates for near-term quantum algorithms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 120504 (2020).
  19. S. Krinner, P. Kurpiers, B. Royer, P. Magnard, I. Tsitsilin, J. C. Besse, A. Remm, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Demonstration of an all-microwave controlled-phase gate between far-detuned qubits, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 044039 (2020).
  20. L. Ding, M. Hays, Y. Sung, B. Kannan, J. An, A. Di Paolo, A. H. Karamlou, T. M. Hazard, K. Azar et al., High-fidelity, frequency-flexible two-qubit fluxonium gates with a transmon coupler, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031035 (2023).
  21. A. P. Singh, K. Mitarai, Y. Suzuki, K. Heya, Y. Tabuchi, K. Fujii, and Y. Nakamura, Experimental demonstration of a high-fidelity virtual two-qubit gate, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013235 (2024).
  22. J. Ku, X. Xu, M. Brink, D. C. McKay, J. B. Hertzberg, M. H. Ansari, and B. L. T. Plourde, Suppression of unwanted ZZ interactions in a hybrid two-qubit system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 200504 (2020).
  23. Z. Ni, S. Li, L. Zhang, J. Chu, J. Niu, T. Yan, X. Deng, L. Hu, J. Li, Y. Zhong, S. Liu, F. Yan, Y. Xu, and D. Yu, Scalable method for eliminating residual ZZ interaction between superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 040502 (2022).
  24. X. Xu and M. H. Ansari, ZZ freedom in two-qubit gate, Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, 064074 (2021).
  25. Z. Huang, T. Kim, T. Roy, Y. Lu, A. Romanenko, S. Zhu, and A. Grassellino, Fast ZZ-free entangling gates for superconducting qubits assisted by a driven resonator, Phys. Rev. Appl. 22, 034007 (2024).
  26. M. C. Collodo, J. Herrmann, N. Lacroix, C. K. Andersen, A. Remm, S. Lazar, J.-C. Besse, T. Walter, A. Wallraff, and C. Eichler, Implementation of conditional phase gates based on tunable ZZ interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 240502 (2020).
  27. P. Zhao, P. Xu, D. Lan, J. Chu, X. Tan, H. Yu, and Y. Yu, High-contrast ZZ interaction using superconducting qubits with opposite-sign anharmonicity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 200503 (2020).
  28. J. Long, T. Zhao, M. Bal, R. Zhao, G. S. Barron, H.-s. Ku, J. A. Howard, X. Wu, C. Rae, H. McRae, X.-H. Deng et al., A universal quantum gate set for transmon qubits with strong ZZ interactions, arXiv:2103.12305.
  29. S. Lloyd, A potentially realizable quantum computer, Science 261, 1569 (1993).
  30. S. C. Benjamin, Schemes for parallel quantum computation without local control of qubits, Phys. Rev. A 61, 020301(R) (2000).
  31. S. C. Benjamin, Quantum computing without local control of qubit-qubit interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 017904 (2001).
  32. S. C. Benjamin and S. Bose, Quantum computing with an always-on Heisenberg interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 247901 (2003).
  33. F. Cesa and H. Pichler, Universal quantum computation in globally driven Rydberg atom arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 170601 (2023).
  34. For an excellent review on quantum information with Rydberg atoms, see e.g., M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Quantum information with Rydberg atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 2313 (2010).
  35. C. Fromonteil, R. Tricarico, F. Cesa, and H. Pichler, Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equations for Rydberg-blockade processes, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033333 (2024).
  36. E. Urban, T. A. Johnson, T. Henage, L. Isenhower, D. D. Yavuz, T. G. Walker, and M. Saffman, Observation of Rydberg blockade between two atoms, Nat. Phys. 5, 110 (2009).
  37. The total number of row-couplers is equal to N−1, bringing the total number of superconducting qubits to Ntot=(2N+3)N+N−1=2N2+4N−1, while the total number of columns is Ncolumn=2N+3.
  38. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L012065 for a wealth of additional technical details.
  39. More specifically at any given time, either the control pulse VA(t) is active while VB(t) and VC(t) are not, or, if either VB(t) or VC(t) is active, then VA(t) is not i.e., ΩA(t)≠0⇒ΩB(t)=ΩC(t)=0, and ΩB(t)≠0 or ΩC(t)≠0⇒ΩA(t)=0.
  40. Depending on the circuit design, indeed, the longitudinal ZZ-coupling ζ in Eq. (2) can be either positive [22, 24, 27, 28] or negative [23, 26]. However, its sign does not influence the blockade effect. Indeed, the ZZ interaction detunes the |eg〉→|ee〉 and |ge〉→|ee〉 transitions with respect to the non-interacting case, effectively “blocking” these transitions and making the |ee〉 state inaccessible with the external pulses that we use. Also, we remark that ζ∼kHz−MHz while the natural frequency of the qubits is ωχ∼GHz. Thus, for a two-qubit system, the |ee〉 state is the highest in energy even in the presence of interactions.
  41. Here, the symbol χ¯ denotes a species that is distinct from χ.
  42. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010).
  43. This can be done through three different types of π pulses: one that acts only on the non-crossed elements of A [i.e., Π̂Ar:=ŴAr(π,x)], and the others on the full set of B- and C-type qubits [i.e., Π̂B:=ŴB(π,x;π,x), Π̂C:=ŴC(π,x;π,x)]. Specifically, if the ICC of |Ψ;k〉 is of B or C type, we take Ûshift=Π̂ArΠ̂BΠ̂CΠ̂Ar, while if it is of A type we use Ûshift=Π̂BΠ̂CΠ̂ArΠ̂BΠ̂C. Notice that, since in both scenarios the action of Ûshift on the well-formed state coincides (up to a global phase) with its own inverse (see the SM [38]), the same operation can also be used to induce a collective motion of the interface in the opposite direction, i.e., Ûshift|Ψ;k+1〉=|Ψ;k〉, see Fig. 2.
  44. The key observation here is that when the kth column of |Ψ;k〉 is made of B-type qubits, the unitary ẐArtot defined at the end of the previous section is equivalent to the application of a σ̂(z) gate to each of the element of the ICC, i.e., ẐArtot|Ψ;k〉=|(σ̂(z))⊗NΨ;k〉. Notably, the same property holds also when we replace the |g⊗N〉 state of a ferromagnetic B-type column of |Ψ;k〉 with a generic N-qubit state. Exploiting this effect it then follows that, given a unit vector n⊥ orthogonal to z, the sequence ẐArtotŴB×(θ/2,−n⊥)ẐArtotŴB×(θ/2,n⊥) maps |Ψ;k〉 into a new state |Ψ′;k〉 with a new ICC vector |Ψ′〉 obtained from |Ψ〉 via the application of the single-qubit rotation σ̂(z)R̂(θ/2,−n⊥)σ̂(z)R̂(θ/2,n⊥)=R̂(θ,n⊥) on the crossed element of the column. Analogous considerations apply also to the case in which the ICC is of C type.
  45. L. DiCarlo, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. S. Bishop, B. R. Johnson, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor, Nature (London) 460, 240 (2009).
  46. Y. Sung, A. Vepsäläinen, J. Braumüller, F. Yan, J. I-J. Wang, M. Kjaergaard, R. Winik, P. Krantz, A. Bengtsson, A. J. Melville et al., Multi-level quantum noise spectroscopy, Nat. Commun. 12, 967 (2021).
  47. A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012).
  48. J. Roffe, D. R. White, S. Burton, and E. Campbell, Decoding across the quantum low-density parity-check code landscape, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043423 (2020).
  49. N. P. Breuckmann and J. N. Eberhardt, Quantum low-density parity-check codes, PRX Quantum 2, 040101 (2021).
  50. F. Marxer, A. Vepsäläinen, S. W. Jolin, J. Tuorila, A. Landra, C. Ockeloen-Korppi, W. Liu, O. Ahonen, A. Auer, L. Belzane et al., Long-distance transmon coupler with cz-gate fidelity above 99.8%, PRX Quantum 4, 010314 (2023).
  51. X. Deng, W. Zheng, X. Liao, H. Zhou, Y. Ge, J. Zhao, D. Lan, X. Tan, Y. Zhang, S. Li, and Y. Yu, Long-range ZZ interaction via resonator-induced phase in superconducting qubits, arXiv:2408.16617.
  52. A. Bririd, S. C. Benjamin, and A. Kay, Quantum error correction in globally controlled arrays, arXiv:quant-ph/0308113.
  53. A. Kay, Error correcting the control unit in global control schemes, arXiv:quant-ph/0504197.
  54. A. Kay, Deriving a fault-tolerant threshold for a global control scheme, arXiv:quant-ph/0702239.
  55. J. Fitzsimons and J. Twamley, Globally controlled fault tolerant quantum computation, arXiv:0707.1119.
  56. J. Fitzsimons and J. Twamley, Quantum fault tolerance in systems with restricted control, Electronic Notes in Theor. Computer Sci. 258, 35 (2009).
  57. D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with constant error rate, SIAM J. Comput. 38, 4 (2008).
  58. A. Gold, J. P. Paquette, A. Stockklauser, M. J. Reagor, M. S. Alam, A. Bestwick, N. Didier, A. Nersisyan, F. Oruc, A. Razavi et al., Entanglement across separate silicon dies in a modular superconducting qubit device, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 142 (2021).
  59. J. Niu, L. Zhang, Y. Liu, J. Qiu, W. Huang, J. Huang, H. Jia, J. Liu, Z. Tao, W. Wei et al., Low-loss interconnects for modular superconducting quantum processors, Nat. Electron. 6, 235 (2023).
  60. D. Rosenberg, D. Kim, R. Das, D. Yost, S. Gustavsson, D. Hover, P. Krantz, A. Melville, L. Racz, G. O. Samach et al., 3D integrated superconducting qubits, npj Quantum Inf. 3, 42 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 7, L012065– Published 12 March, 2025
  • Received 8 July 2024
  • Accepted 11 December 2024
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