Fig. 3: Parity curves for EASE and sequential gates and a 11-qubit TIQIP all-to-all connectivity diagram. | Nature Communications

Fig. 3: Parity curves for EASE and sequential gates and a 11-qubit TIQIP all-to-all connectivity diagram.

From: Efficient arbitrary simultaneously entangling gates on a trapped-ion quantum computer

Fig. 3

The connectivity diagram displays the ion pairs used in the experiments. The associated fidelities are computed from the amplitudes of the measured parity and populations via maximum likelihood estimation. a Parity curve for an EASE gate with five simultaneous XX interactions. We chose pulses with Nseg = 35 and gate time τ = 924.0 μs. This gate yielded an average fidelity of \(88.{3}_{-1.6}^{+1.0} \%\) with an average deviation from the ideal fidelity of \(2.{3}_{-1.6}^{+2.1} \%\) for the 50 non-involved pairs. b Parity curve for a series of five sequential XX interactions. We chose pulses with Nseg = 27 for each XX gate with gate time τ = 318.6 μs, which yielded an average fidelity of \(92.{0}_{-1.4}^{+0.8} \%\) with an average deviation from the ideal fidelity of \(0.{9}_{-1.0}^{+2.4} \%\) for the 50 non-involved pairs. To ensure a fair comparison of gate times, we made sure that the peak powers at which we executed the EASE and the sequential gates differed by no more than 0.5%. Thus, comparing the EASE and sequential-based approaches to create the same final state of all qubits, application of the EASE gate saved ~669.0 μs, i.e., 42% of the total gate time needed in the sequential approach. The quoted errors are 1σ confidence intervals from the maximum likelihood estimation. See Supplementary Note 3 for implementation details.

Back to article page