Abstract
The large scale control over thousands of quantum emitters desired by quantum network technology is limited by the power consumption and crosstalk inherent in current microwave techniques. Here we propose a quantum repeater architecture based on denselypacked diamond color centers (CCs) in a programmable electrode array, with quantum gates driven by electric or strain fields. This ‘field programmable spin array’ (FPSA) enables highspeed spin control of individual CCs with low crosstalk and power dissipation. Integrated in a slowlight waveguide for efficient optical coupling, the FPSA serves as a quantum interface for opticallymediated entanglement. We evaluate the performance of the FPSA architecture in comparison to a routingtree design and show an increased entanglement generation rate scaling into the thousandqubit regime. Our results enable high fidelity control of dense quantum emitter arrays for scalable networking.
Introduction
Future quantum repeaters or modular quantum computers will need to manage large numbers of multiplexed memory qubits with efficient local operations. Solidstate artificial atoms such as color centers (CCs) in diamond are promising quantum memories^{1,2}. Precision control of the electronic spin ground state of CCs presently relies on AC magnetic fields^{3,4,5,6}. Developing architectures for spatially multiplexed microwave control with sufficiently low power dissipation and crosstalk remains an open challenge. Previous work achieved localized control using a magnetic field with a spatial gradient^{7}, or by producing a spatiallyvarying detuning of the CC resonant frequency using a gradient magnetic^{8} or optical^{9} field combined with global magnetic addressing. Here, we propose a fundamentally different approach that uses highly localized fields—either strain or electric, depending on the CC of choice—which can be driven capacitively for low power dissipation. Electric fieldbased spin control has been proposed in several systems^{10,11,12}, while strain driving has been demonstrated for many CC systems^{13,14}. We show that these approaches offer lower power dissipation and crosstalk, as well as compatibility with integrated circuit (IC) platforms likely needed for scaling. With an efficient optical interface and alltoall connectivity, our platform can be integrated to allow scalable entanglement generation.
We consider a programmable array of electrodes positioned around arrays of CCs in a diamond waveguide. This ‘field programmable spin array’ (FPSA) architecture has three key elements: (1) A quantum memory; for the electricdriving case the diamond nitrogenvacancy (NV) center, which has already been used for optical entanglement distribution across as many as three qubits^{15,16,17}, and for strain driving the diamond siliconvacancy (SiV) center, which has been used to demonstrate memoryenhanced quantum communication^{18}. (2) An efficient optical interface through a slowlight photonic crystal (PhC) waveguide enabling ~ 25 × Purcell enhancement of the CC’s coherent transition. Compared to cavity structures, the slowlight waveguide can host a large number of qubits and still maintain relatively high Purcell enhancement. 3. An electrode array positioned along individual qubits in the waveguide. We estimate that the FPSA enables ~ 100 nsduration spin rotations, as well as ~ 600 GHzrange DC tuning of CC optical transitions.
The article is organized as follows. We first introduce the FPSA and estimates achievable gate performance, focusing chiefly on duration and crosstalk. Then codesigned PhC waveguide is described to achieve high emitterwaveguide coupling with low optical loss, as well as dynamical optical tunability. The final section combines the elements of two previous sections to show a quantum repeater architecture enabled by the FPSA, illustrating how the FPSA can mediate local qubit interactions and multiplexed quantum network connectivity. In the first several sections we first explore the case of NV centers in diamond, driven by electric fields, and second the inversionsymmetric group IV emitters controlled via strain fields. In the final section we consider NV centers as the exemplary CC for quantum architecture design.
Results
Localized singlequbit control
Figure 1 shows the FPSA design. It consists of a singlemode diamond waveguide hosting a centered CC array, placed onto dielectric fins between an electrode array. For the electricdriving approach, we use HfO_{2} as it has a high dielectric constant of 23 in the radio frequency range and a relatively low index of 1.9 in the optical range^{19,20}. This allows it to concentrate the low frequency electric field required for spin coupling while guiding the optical mode. In the case of strain driving, we use piezeoelectric AlN fins that produce the strain field while also producing a periodic modulation of the refractive index (n = 2.16). We assume conductive indium tin oxide (ITO) as the electrode material to minimize optical loss. Finally we use SiO_{2} as a lowindex substrate.
As illustrated in Fig. 1, we consider an array of CC spin memories approximately at a periodic spacing a, i.e., the kth CC has a position \({\vec{r}}_{k}=ka\hat{z}+{\vec{\delta }}_{k}\), where \({\vec{\delta }}_{k}/a\ll 1\).
Electric fielddriven quantum gates
We first consider NV centers as an exemplary CC, and show that electric fields can produce highfidelity localized quantum gates. The relevant interaction between an NV ground state spin and an electromagnetic field \(\vec{E}\) and \(\vec{B}\) is captured in the Hamiltonian^{14,21,22}:
where \({d}_{\perp }={\hat{z}}^{{\prime} }\times ({\hat{z}}^{{\prime} }\times \vec{d}) =\) 17 Hz cm/V (\({d}_{\parallel }={\hat{z}}^{{\prime} }\cdot \vec{d}\) = 0.35 Hz cm/V) denotes the perpendicular (parallel) part of spinelectric field susceptibility^{21}, h the Planck constant, S the electron spin operator, and γ_{S} the gyromagnetic ratio. \({d}_{\perp }^{{\prime} }\) has not been quantified experimentally or theoretically, but is estimated near 1/50 d_{⊥}^{14,23}. Here we use the primed coordinates \(({x}^{{\prime} },{y}^{{\prime} },{z}^{{\prime} })\) to indicate the coordinates relative to the NV aligned along the \({z}^{{\prime} }\) axis.
We now consider an external electric driving field \({\vec{E}}_{\pm 1\leftrightarrow 0}\) (\({\vec{E}}_{+1\leftrightarrow 1}\)) resonant with the \(\left\pm 1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left0\right\rangle\) (\(\left +1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left1\right\rangle\)) transitions, which are nondegenerate under a small bias magnetic field along the \({z}^{{\prime} }\)axis, as shown in Fig. 1a. From the Schrödinger equation, the Rabi frequency of coherent driving on the NV ground state triplet is:
where \({\vec{r}}_{k}\) indicates the positions of NVs shown in Fig. 1 and \({\vec{E}}_{\perp }({\vec{r}}_{k})\) is the component of electric field perpendicular to NV axis. As shown in Fig. 1a, b, we choose \({\vec{\mu }}_{1}=[1\bar{1}0]\) and \({\vec{\mu }}_{2}=[\bar{1}\bar{1}2]\) as basis vectors for the plane perpendicular to NV axis, i.e. \({\vec{E}}_{\perp }({\vec{r}}_{k})=({E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{1}}({\vec{r}}_{k}),{E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{2}}({\vec{r}}_{k}))\) where \({\vec{\mu }}_{1}\) and \({\vec{\mu }}_{2}\) are also the axes of NV optical transitions \({E}_{y}^{op}\) and \({E}_{x}^{op}\), respectively^{24}.
Absent other experimental noise, the singlequbit gate fidelity is limited by the inhomogeneous dephasing time \({T}_{2}^{*} \sim 10\,\upmu s\)^{25}. For a pure superposition state, the fidelity of a πrotation at Rabi frequency Ω_{R} under this dephasing process is given by \({F}_{{{{{{{{\rm{dephasing}}}}}}}}}=1/2(1+\exp (1/2{\Omega }_{R}{T}_{2}^{*}))\). Considering random pure states uniformlydistributed on the Bloch sphere, the average fidelity reaches above 0.99 with a Rabi frequency of 1.7 MHz. For double quantum transition, a resonant electric field of 10 V/μm is needed to reach this gate fidelity. In our geometry, this requirement is met for a ~ 10 V potential difference, which is compatible with modern integrated circuits technology such as complementary metaloxide semiconductor (CMOS) platforms. We estimate that electric fielddriven Rabi frequencies can reach \({\Omega }_{R}^{+1\leftrightarrow 1} \sim 0.13\) GHz and \({\Omega }_{R}^{\pm 1\leftrightarrow 0} \sim\) 1.9 MHz, limited by diamond’s dielectric strength \({E}_{{{{{{{{\rm{bd}}}}}}}}}^{{{{{{{{\rm{dmd}}}}}}}}} \sim 2\times 1{0}^{3}\) V/μm^{26,27} and HfO_{2}’s dielectric strength \({E}_{{{{{{{{\rm{bd}}}}}}}}}^{{{{{{{{{\rm{HfO}}}}}}}}}_{2}} \sim 1.6\times 1{0}^{3}\) V/μm^{28} at a separation of hundreds of nm.
The electric field profile of an example FPSA is shown in Fig. 2a, which plots the \({\vec{E}}_{\perp }(x,y,z=0)\) electric field component obtained from Maxwell’s equations using COMSOL Multiphysics when a voltage \({V}_{k}={V}_{k}^{t}{V}_{k}^{b}=50\) V is applied in FPSA with parameters in Table 1.
Straindriven quantum gates
Although NV is widely investigated, GroupIV centers in diamond have drawn interest due to their inversion symmetry and optical properties^{29}. However, due to the inversionsymmetry, the spin and orbital transitions of GroupIV emitters are almost immune to electric fields^{30}. We then propose to use a strain field for quantum control. The Rabi frequency when an oscillating strain field is resonant with the \(\left{e}_{g+}\uparrow \right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left{e}_{g}\downarrow \right\rangle\) transition is^{13,31}:
where β and γ are the magnitudes of transverse AC strain fields that couple to the SiV spin, B_{⊥} is a static transverse magnetic bias field, and λ_{SO} is the spinorbit coupling strength. We consider a resonant strain field generated in an FPSA structure as shown in Fig. 1, where the electric field produces a strain field in piezoelectric AlN fins rather than being guided using HfO_{2} as previous. The Rabi frequency induced by a strain field in the FPSA geometry is shown in Fig. 2d when a voltage \({V}_{k}={V}_{k}^{t}{V}_{k}^{b}=2\) V is applied, assuming a transverse bias field of B_{⊥} = 0.17 T as used in prior work^{31}. The parameters of the device are listed in Table 1. Note that the electrodes are placed offcenter from the emitter, with four total electrodes per unit cell. These added controls allow for manipulation over the additional degrees of freedom of strain fields as compared to electric fields (see Supplementary). To achieve a π rotation of the spin degree of freedom with F = 0.99, a ~ 0.01 V potential difference is needed in our structure—within the range of modern integrated circuit technology such as CMOS platforms.
Control crosstalk
The closest separation between individually controllable CCs in an array is limited by the crosstalk between the target CC at location \({\vec{r}}_{k}\) and its nearestneighbor CC at \({\vec{r}}_{k+1}\). During a πpulse on qubit \({\vec{r}}_{k}\), there is an undesired rotation on \({\vec{r}}_{k+1}\). We evaluate the crosstalk fidelity F_{C} by comparing \({{{{{{{\bf{R}}}}}}}}({\vec{r}}_{k+1})\) and desired identity operation \({{{{{{{\bf{I}}}}}}}}({\vec{r}}_{k+1})\). This fidelity can be expressed as
where
and \(\left{\psi }_{0}({\vec{r}}_{k+1})\right\rangle\) is the initial quantum state of CC at location \({\vec{r}}_{k+1}\). For the profile shown in Fig. 2a, \({F}_{{{{{{{{\rm{C}}}}}}}}}^{{{{{{{{\rm{fin}}}}}}}}}=0.92\). The field confinement provided by the HfO_{2} fins results in a significant improvement over bare electrodes, where \({F}_{C}^{{{{{{{{\rm{bare}}}}}}}}}=0.69\) (see Supplementary).
For localized strain driving structures shown in Fig. 2d, we calculate a crosstalk fidelity of 0.88. The crosstalk fidelity for strain tuning is lower than that of the electric field case because the acoustic wavelength (~μm) is comparable with the device size. A propagating acoustic wave is launched along the waveguide, which makes it difficult to localize the strain field compared to the electric field.
Crosstalk elimination
To further reduce the crosstalk, we use our individual control over 2N voltages \(V=\{{V}_{k}^{t(b)}\}\) to eliminate the driving field at the locations of the nontarget qubits. Electric field applied on each qubit \({\vec{E}}_{\perp }=\{{E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{1}}({\vec{r}}_{k}),{E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{2}}({\vec{r}}_{k})\}\) has a linear dependence with the voltage by \({\vec{E}}_{\perp }=GV\), where G_{ij} is the linear map between E_{i} and V_{j}, computed by COMSOL Multiphysics. V are then chosen to minimize the crosstalk by \({V}_{{{{{{{{\rm{CE}}}}}}}}}={G}^{1}{\vec{E}}_{{{{{{{{\rm{tar}}}}}}}}}\). For the case of a singlequbit gate on a target NV at location i, we set \({\vec{E}}_{{{{{{{{\rm{tar}}}}}}}}}={\vec{E}}_{\perp,{{{{{{{\rm{tar}}}}}}}}}^{T}{\otimes }_{{{{{{{{\rm{K}}}}}}}}}{\delta }_{ik}\) and \({\vec{E}}_{\perp,{{{{{{{\rm{tar}}}}}}}}}\) is the AC electric field applied on the target NV. Since the number of independent degrees of freedom is equal to the number of electric field values to be minimized, this inversion is possible. As shown in Fig. 2b, c, the crosstalk elimination process creates low electric field on nontarget NV positions, increasing the crosstalk fidelity to F_{CE} > 0.99. The tolerance of the NV position to achieve this fidelity is 18 nm (73 nm) for the first (second) nearest neighbors shown in Fig. 2c. Now, the total infidelity is mainly caused by dephasing rather than crosstalk. This procedure can be used for any arbitrary operations over all NVs by the above procedure, choosing a specific \({\vec{E}}_{\perp,{{{{{{{\rm{tar}}}}}}}}}\).
Although the strain field is a tensor, a similar crosstalk elimination process can be applied for strain tuning, as shown in Fig. 2e and Fig. 2f. the crosstalk fidelity can go to F = 0.99 with a tolerance of NV position of ~110 nm along xaxis. The distance along xaxis needed to achieve crosstalk fidelity F = 0.99 is 1.2 μm (0.36 μm) for strain (electric) field, meaning electric field can be more localized in FPSA design.
Heat load for electric field vs magneticfieldbased spin control
Heat dissipation is critically important in cryogenic environments, where cooling power is limited and heating can degrade performance. We approximate the lowtemperature stage power consumption of electric fieldbased coherent control by modeling the FPSA as a capacitance C with a parallel resistance R in series with a wire (resistance R_{w} ~ 10^{−2} Ω) inside the cryogenic environment (circuit details in Supplementary). We choose the figure of merit as the energy per spin πpulse that is deposited at the lowtemperature stage. In our design, the FPSA acts as an open circuit, and almost all the power is reflected back to the high temperature region. For \(\left +1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left1\right\rangle\) transition, the energy dissipation in the cryostat is given by:
where ω is the frequency of the AC electric field, and Λ ~ 1 μm is the characteristic length that relates the applied voltage on the FPSA and electric field at the positions of NVs. In our geometry, C = 4.9 × 10^{−17} F is the circuit capacitance simulated by COMSOL and R ~ 10^{20} Ω is the resistance of the HfO_{2} calculated from thin film resistivity^{32}. The energy dissipation in the cryostat per πpulse J_{E} for a Rabi frequency Ω_{R} = 1.7 MHz is 1.4 × 10^{−21} J with a peak maximum current I = 98 mA. A second figure of merit is the dissipation ratio between electric field and magnetic fieldbased driving with the same Rabi frequency, J_{E}/J_{B}. Here we take the magnetic circuit to be the bare wire with a resistance R_{w} and a capacitance C_{w}, with the NV positioned at a distance Λ from the wire. Then the ratio is given by:
where μ_{0} is the vacuum permeability. Here J_{E}/J_{B} = 1.0 × 10^{−5}, suggesting the power dissipation for electric field control is 6 orders of magnitude less than that for magnetic field control. For driving a single quantum transition \(\left0\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left\pm 1\right\rangle,{J}_{E}/{J}_{B}=5.0\times 1{0}^{2}\). In the real case, we need to consider the leakage current. For a ~ PΩ leakage resistance^{33}, we will have J_{E}/J_{B} = 1.2 × 10^{−4 }(6.0 × 10^{−1}) for \(\left +1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left1\right\rangle\) (\(\left\pm 1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left0\right\rangle\)) transitions. A similar calculation can be made for strainbased FPSA. Assuming a transverse bias field of B_{⊥} = 0.17 T as used in prior work^{31} with U_{e} = 0.14 V to reach Ω_{R} = 20 MHz and a ~ PΩ leakage resistance^{33}, the heat load per πpulse in the lowtemperature part for this circuit is 2.5 × 10^{−25} J. For a comparison with microwave control, we assume β = − 1.29 × 10^{2} GHz based on^{34} and the heat load ratio J_{S}/J_{B} = 8.9 × 10^{−9}. See Supplementary Note 6 for details. Here we only consider the heat load in low temperature part. For high temperature part, the heat generated on the transmission line for strainbased FPSA is 2.5 × 10^{−12} J with a peak current of 1.4 mA, which is much larger than the heat load in cryogenic stage.
Efficient coupling of an NV array to a slowlight PhC waveguide
The entanglement rate of NV centers relies on the spinphoton coupling efficiency, which is given by^{35,36}:
where Γ_{wg0} is the decay rate of spinentangled transition in the absence of any optical structures, and Γ_{others} the total rate of all other decay mechanisms. Slowlight waveguide structures produce a photonic bandgap, resulting in a small group velocity near the band edge. As a result, an emitter placed in the mode maximum of a slowlight waveguide experiences a large enhancement in the local density of electromagnetic states, and its rate of transition is enhanced by the Purcell factor, F_{p}^{36,37}.
Conveniently, the fin structures provide a periodic dielectric perturbation, forming a slowlight mode in the optical band. Fig. 3a indicates the TElike modes of the slowlight waveguide with the parameters shown in Table 1. Here we focus on the \({E}_{y}^{op}\) transition of the NV center with a frequency ν_{0}. By coupling the NV transition at ν_{0} to the slowlight region, we can thus funnel the coherent emission into waveguide modes near wavevector k_{x}(ν_{0}), as shown in Fig. 3a. From finite difference time domain (FDTD) simulations (Lumerical), we obtain a maximum Purcell factor of \({F}_{P\max }=25\) for an NV in the [111] direction placed on the mid plane of the diamond waveguide when the number of periods is 100 (Fig. 3b).
The total photon collection efficiency out of the waveguide is given by \({\eta }_{wg}=\beta \exp ({t}_{wg}N)\), where t_{wg} is the waveguide transmission from the emitter to the waveguide facet. Assuming a NV DebyeWaller factor of DW = 0.03^{23} and we use the relation Γ_{others}/Γ_{total} = 1 − DW to calculate β = 25%^{38,39}. The transmission loss t_{wg} ~ 8 × 10^{−4} dB/period is estimated from FDTD simulations.
Spectral addressing by localized optical tuning
To selectively couple the waveguide propagating modes to a specific CC center in the array, we use the electrodes for another function: to tune the optical transition frequency of individual CCs. In the case of NVs under electric field control, the emitter’s natural \({E}_{y}^{op}\) transition at ν_{0} is shifted to ν_{0} + Δν_{0}, where Δν_{0} is given by^{40}:
where E_{∥} is the electric field along [111], \(\Delta {\mu }_{\parallel }={\mu }_{\parallel }^{{{{{{{{\rm{GS}}}}}}}}}{\mu }_{\parallel }^{{{{{{{{\rm{ES}}}}}}}}} \sim 1.5\) D is the parallel dipole moment difference between excited states and ground states, and μ_{⊥} ~ 2.1 D is the perpendicular component of electric dipole moment. Here we choose \({E}_{y}^{op}\) transition to avoid the depopulation and mixing of excited states at large applied fields^{41}.
The maximum tuning range using this effect is ~ 600 GHz assuming an applied electric field of 10^{2} V/μm in the FPSA architecture, indicated by the green shaded area in Fig. 3b. This corresponds to tuning across the full range of the slowlight Purcell enhancement and into the waveguide bandgap. As the Purcellenhanced NV ZPL transition linewidth is ~ 100 MHz, the wide range of the Stark tuning allows multiplefrequency channels in which NVs can be individually addressed in the frequency domain. Three channels (Ch1 − 3) spaced by 40 GHz and an offresonant channel (Ch0) are indicated in Fig. 3b. The Purcell enhancement across Ch1 − 3 is maintained at ~ 10, while the large spacing suppresses interactions (e.g. photon absorption) between channels^{42}. An analogous effect can be achieved using strain tuning^{31}, see Supplementary Note 6 for details.
The ability for FPSA to reconfigure the electric field profile locally allows for arbitrary and independent configuration of NV optical transitions. Unlike in Sec. I where the E_{∥} is neglected, here we need 3N degree of freedoms to control components \({E}_{\parallel },\,{E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{1}}\) and \({E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{2}}\) for each of the N NVs. However, we can use symmetry V_{t} + V_{b} = 0 to set \({E}_{\parallel }={E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{2}}=0\) in the ideal case. The remaining N degrees of freedom can be used to set \({E}_{{\vec{\mu }}_{1}}\) for all the NVs. For example, we compare two configurations in Fig. 3d. The blue curve shows the frequency shift for an electric field profile in Fig. 3c, resulting in two NVs on resonance. The red curve shows the frequency shift for a different voltage setting, where two NVs are in different channels without interaction. In both cases, all other NVs are offresonant in Ch0. The ability to dynamically control the NV transition frequency via electrical control can then be used to perform individual emitter initialization and readout, and to reconfigure quantum network connectivity as described below.
Quantum repeater performance
We next consider the application of the FPSA as a quantum repeater to generate Bell pairs \(\left{\psi }_{{{{{{{{\rm{AB}}}}}}}}}\right\rangle\) between two memory qubits at Alice and Bob (A and B), as illustrated in Fig. 4a. Many quantum repeater protocols have been proposed in previous works, including the use of quantum emitters as quantum memories^{43}, and multiplexing schemes that achieve alltoall connectivity^{44,45}. Here we show the FPSA can improve the repeater performance via an improved scaling with number of qubits. The repeater protocol has two steps:

(1)
Distant entanglement between A(B) and electron spin \(\left{j}_{e}\right\rangle (\left{k}_{e}\right\rangle )\) in the FPSA. Many schemes are proposed for entanglement generation within cavities and waveguides^{46,47,48}. Here we choose a heralded singlephoton scheme, which has previously been demonstrated for NV centers^{16}, followed by swapping to the ^{15}N nuclear spin \(\left{j}_{n}\right\rangle (\left{k}_{n}\right\rangle )\). For each link, we assume a lengthL noiseless channel with transmission \(\eta=\exp (\gamma L)\), where γ = 0.041 km^{−1}^{44}. Each entanglement attempt has a success probability of p_{1} = 2αηp_{d}p_{c}η_{wg}/2, where p_{d} = 0.83 (p_{c} = 0.33) is the detection (quantum frequency conversion, if necessary) efficiency^{49,50}. We conservatively assume a lower F_{P} = 10 (β = 25%) to avoid high loss and fabrication sensitivity in the regime of high group index^{51}. Here we set α = 0.01 to keep the twophoton excitation error of this scheme below 1%^{16}.

(2)
Local entanglement swapping to generate entanglement between A and B. First, (2.i) CC electron spins \(\left{j}_{e}\right\rangle\) and \(\left{k}_{e}\right\rangle\) are Starkshifted to the same optical transition and entangled via the twophoton BarrettKok scheme^{17,48} with success probability \({p}_{2}={({p}_{d}{\eta }_{wg})}^{2}/2\). Then, (2.ii) A CNOT gate is performed between electron spin and nuclear spin to establish the local entanglement, then Bell measurements in the electronnuclear spin basis of the memories j and k swap the local entanglement to distant entanglement of A and B after subsequent feedforward^{52,53}. This step makes use of the FPSA’s alltoall connectivity to realize a ‘quantum router’ architecture^{44} that minimizes the latency (waiting time and associated decoherence) and local buffer size.
To evaluate the performance, we consider the entanglement rate Γ_{AB} as the figure of merit, defined as the average number of generated Bell pairs \(\left{\psi }_{{{{{{{{\rm{AB}}}}}}}}}\right\rangle\) per second. For two qubits, Γ_{AB} is the inverse of total time used for single pair entanglement generation. Parallel operations of N pairs can increase this rate by a factor of N. The FPSA timemultiplexes spinphoton entanglement to A and B, sending spinentangled photons from different emitters in short succession. It is implemented by Starkshifting the optical transition of selected color centers j and k from Ch0 to Ch1 and Ch2 (shown in Fig. 4a), while all other ‘unselected’ color centers remain in Ch0. After an entanglement generation attempt, the NVs j, k are tuned back into Ch0 and the process is repeated with the subsequent pair of NVs j, k = j + 1, k + 1 as shown in Fig. 4a. In this way, timemultiplexing channels allow N_{ch} = t_{link}/t_{ph} qubits operate in parallel, where t_{link} is the heralding time for an optical pulse traveling photon in the fiber link and t_{ph} is the CC photon lifetime. For a 1 km link and 10 ns lifetime, we have N_{ch} ~ 300 timemultiplexing channels. Additional frequency channels can further raise the number of timefrequency bins for distant entanglement generation. The Stark shift tuning range, bandwidth of the slowlight effect, qubit linewidth and frequency multiplexer bandwidth limit the number of multiplexing channels. In our device, the regime of the Purcell factor > 10 has a bandwidth of ~ 200 GHz, setting the total frequency range. Here we assume a 20 GHz bandwidth for the frequency multiplexer based on the potential dense wavelength division multiplexing^{54}. Therefore, the timefrequency channel capacity in FPSA is 10 t_{link}/t_{ph}. In the regime that we have fewer qubits than the channel capacity, each qubit pair can effectively generate entanglement independently. Above this number, qubits will compete for channel usage.
The same dynamically tunable operations allow us to immediately attempt local entanglement as soon as distant entanglement is heralded. After a heralding signal from both A and B, we shift both qubits j, k to Ch3 and generate local entanglement as described above. Due to localized independent electric fieldbased control, we can parallelize local entanglement generation (step 2) while simultaneously attempting entanglement over the long distance (step 1) links using other qubits (e.g. j, k = j + 1, k + 1) rather than requiring sequential operations. The entanglement rate is then mainly limited by the first step.
While increasing qubit number improves Γ_{AB} linearly in the ideal case, each additional qubit adds exponential loss to the device as larger device size leads to transmission \({\eta }_{wg}\propto \exp ({t}_{wg}N)\). The entanglement rate is given by \({\Gamma }_{{{{{{{{\rm{AB}}}}}}}}}\propto N\exp ({t}_{wg}N)\), as shown in the blue curve in Fig. 4b for parameters given in Table 1. The FPSA reaches a maximum rate of Γ_{AB} = 2.1 × 10^{4} ebits/s when the number of qubits is N = 1824, after which loss decreases rate exponentially with increasing number of qubits. The red curve shows the rate by a MachZehnder interferometer (MZI) tree architecture as a comparison^{55}. Here we assume an 0.4 dB loss per MZI^{56,57}. In this regime, the FPSA outperforms the MZI architecture by a factor of ~ 3. In the limit of large qubit number, the rate scales linearly with N. With very large qubit numbers, the MZI architecture could outperform FPSA because it is not suffering from exponential loss. However, the number of parallel qubits is limited by the timefrequency multiplexing channel capacity. For a 1 km link, the channel capacity is 10 t_{link}/t_{ph} ~ 3000 shown in Fig. 4b.
As an extension, we consider a hybridization of FPSA and MZI tree architectures. As shown in Fig. 4c, we divide the qubits into N_{dev} FPSAs connected by an MZI tree. Γ_{AB} as a function of the number of qubits with different N_{dev} is shown in Fig. 4c. Taking the optimal N_{dev} for each qubit number, we plot the maximum rate envelope shown in the dashed line. Instead of exponential decay, the optimal envelope asymptotically follows a linear scaling. In this scheme, the rate is limited by timefrequency multiplexing channels capacity shown in the gray region in Fig. 4c. For different link lengths, the channel limit changes, resulting in varied maximum rate as shown in Fig. 4d. The rate can be straightforwardly increased with additional frequencymultiplexing channels. Alternatively, a fixed number of memories N can be used more efficiently in schemes with a midway entangled photon pair source^{58,59}, increasing the entanglement rate from ∝ η to \(\sqrt{\eta }\).
Discussion
We comment briefly on (i) fabrication and (ii) qubit choices of the presented FPSA blueprint. (iii) other design considerations for strainbased FPSA.

(i)
Since the diamond can be placed on top of a periodic dielectric perturbation (e.g., by pickandplace of diamond waveguides^{60,61}), enabling the substrate to be designed separately, a number of material choices are available. A potential approach is to produce highindex dielectric fins is to use atomic layer deposition of HfO_{2}/AlN followed by lithography and a liftoff process^{62}, while some common photonic crystal structure like^{63} may be hard to fabricate with diamond due to the difficulty to get a large diamond thin film through undercutting. Moreover, the substrate can be fabricated in CMOS to proximally position the required electrical contacts through a backendofline metallization step. Custom CMOS processes have already been successfully demonstrated for NV spin control via microwave magnetic field interactions^{64}, whereas the electric field control should be easier as less current is required for a given Rabi frequency. Other materials with high dielectric constant such as barium titanate (BTO, ε ~ 7000) would serve as attractive alternatives to HfO_{2} as they could also provide electrooptic modulation of traveling modes^{65}.

(ii)
We considered the diamond NV center because of the reported spinelectric field coupling Hamiltonian and high dielectric strength of diamond—but the NV has several drawbacks. Its rather low coupling strength \({d}_{\perp }^{{\prime} }\) for electric field driving of the \(\left\pm 1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left0\right\rangle\) spin transition limits the Rabi frequency \(f\propto {d}_{\perp }^{{\prime} }\) that can be achieved without driving up the power dissipation \({P}_{E}\propto 1/{d}_{\perp }^{{\prime} 2}\) or risking electrical breakdown. One promising path to address this challenge is to use global microwave driving on the NV \(\left\pm 1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left0\right\rangle\) transition so that individual control can be performed on the \(\left +1\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left1\right\rangle\) transition which has a ~ 50 × stronger coupling to the electric field. Generating large arrays of NV centers with lifetimelimited optical coherence remains an open challenge. NV centers show large spectral diffusion in nanostructures^{66,67} but several recent works have improved the performance^{68,69}. There are several other ways to deal with the spectral diffusion problem. (1). FPSA can use a feedback system to reduce the NV linewidth^{70}. The low capacitance of FPSA allows a short time constant for charging the system, but the feedback will require more measurement time during the quantum entanglement generation process. (2). NVs in larger multimode waveguides far from sidewalls may reduce spectral diffusion like previous work^{71}. The NV centers can still couple to slowlight mode with large Purcell factor via proper design, although there are multiple modes in the waveguide.
The use of the FPSA architecture can be generalized for other color centers in diamond and emitters in other widebandgap materials^{6,10,11,12,30,72}, though different properties (e.g., different electric fieldspin dipole coupling constants) would require different tradeoffs. Emitters in silicon carbide have been demonstrated with a large tuning range by electric field, which can be a promising candidate for FPSA^{73}.

(iii)
For strainbased FPSA, current design launches acoustic waves along the waveguide, inducing a large crosstalk along waveguide direction. Several other designs can be used to localize the acoustic mode like the interdigital transducers (IDT) structures^{13}. A codesigned photonicphononic bandgap structure can also be used to localize acoustic waves^{74}.
Here we have presented an FPSA architecture that addresses several challenges in the development of scalable quantum networks. We showed that electric field control is beneficial for the individual quantum addressing of dense emitter arrays, as power consumption and crosstalk are significantly reduced in comparison to the magnetic field case. Furthermore, the wide tunability via the Stark effect allows for multichannel, parallelized optical entanglement schemes that offer improved scaling with number of qubits. Strain fieldbased FPSA have similar advantages and can be a candidate for color centers with inversion symmetry. Based on these advantages, we expect that FPSA architectures will form the basis of future quantum networking implementations.
Methods
The electric and strain field calculations are conducted by COMSOL Multiphysics. A Multiphysics containing Electrostatics and Solid Mechanics modules are used to solve the strain field. The optical bandstructure and finitedifference timedomain simulations are performed by MIT Photonic Bands (MPB)^{75} and Ansys Lumerical FDTD. The quantum repeater calculation is made by custom MATLAB codes.
Data availability
All Source data are provided as a Source Data file [https://github.com/hanfengw/FPSA_Source_Data].
Code availability
The code used to generate data discussed in the manuscript are provided in [https://github.com/hanfengw/FPSA_code].
References
Ruf, M., Wan, N. H., Choi, H., Englund, D. & Hanson, R. Quantum networks based on color centers in diamond. J. Appl. Phys. 130, 070901 (2021).
Bhaskar, M. K. et al. Quantum nonlinear optics with a germaniumvacancy color center in a nanoscale diamond waveguide. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 223603 (2017).
Fuchs, G., Burkard, G., Klimov, P. & Awschalom, D. A quantum memory intrinsic to single nitrogen–vacancy centres in diamond. Nat. Phys. 7, 789–793 (2011).
Zhang, H., Arai, K., Belthangady, C., Jaskula, J.C. & Walsworth, R. L. Selective addressing of solidstate spins at the nanoscale via magnetic resonance frequency encoding. npj Quantum Inf. 3, 1–8 (2017).
Hong, S. et al. Nanoscale magnetometry with nv centers in diamond. MRS Bull. 38, 155–161 (2013).
Koehl, W. F., Buckley, B. B., Heremans, F. J., Calusine, G. & Awschalom, D. D. Room temperature coherent control of defect spin qubits in silicon carbide. Nature 479, 84–87 (2011).
Bodenstedt, S. et al. Nanoscale spin manipulation with pulsed magnetic gradient fields from a hard disc drive writer. Nano Lett. 18, 5389–5395 (2018).
Jakobi, I. et al. Measuring broadband magnetic fields on the nanoscale using a hybrid quantum register. Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 67–72 (2017).
Sekiguchi, Y., Matsushita, K., Kawasaki, Y. & Kosaka, H. Optically addressable universal holonomic quantum gates on diamond spins. Nat. Photon. 16, 662–666 (2022).
PioroLadriere, M. et al. Electrically driven singleelectron spin resonance in a slanting zeeman field. Nat. Phys. 4, 776–779 (2008).
Klimov, P., Falk, A., Buckley, B. & Awschalom, D. Electrically driven spin resonance in silicon carbide color centers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 087601 (2014).
Corna, A. et al. Electrically driven electron spin resonance mediated by spin–valley–orbit coupling in a silicon Quantum dot. npj Quantum Inf. 4, 1–7 (2018).
Maity, S. et al. Coherent acoustic control of a single silicon vacancy spin in diamond. Nat. Commun. 11, 1–6 (2020).
Udvarhelyi, P., Shkolnikov, V. O., Gali, A., Burkard, G. & Pályi, A. Spinstrain interaction in nitrogenvacancy centers in diamond. Phys. Rev. B 98, 075201 (2018).
Pompili, M. et al. Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solidstate qubits. Science 372, 259–264 (2021).
Humphreys, P. C. et al. Deterministic delivery of remote entanglement on a quantum network. Nature 558, 268–273 (2018).
Bernien, H. et al. Heralded entanglement between solidstate qubits separated by three metres. Nature 497, 86–90 (2013).
Bhaskar, M. K. et al. Experimental demonstration of memoryenhanced quantum communication. Nature 580, 60–64 (2020).
Lin, Y.S., Puthenkovilakam, R. & Chang, J. Dielectric property and thermal stability of hfo 2 on silicon. Appl. Phys. Lett. 81, 2041–2043 (2002).
AlKuhaili, M. Optical properties of hafnium oxide thin films and their application in energyefficient windows. Opt. Mater. 27, 383–387 (2004).
Dolde, F. et al. Electricfield sensing using single diamond spins. Nat. Phys. 7, 459–463 (2011).
Doherty, M. et al. Theory of the groundstate spin of the nv center in diamond. Phys. Rev. B 85, 205203 (2012).
Doherty, M. W., Manson, N. B., Delaney, P. & Hollenberg, L. C. The negatively charged nitrogenvacancy centre in diamond: the electronic solution. N. J. Phys. 13, 025019 (2011).
Epstein, R., Mendoza, F., Kato, Y. & Awschalom, D. Anisotropic interactions of a single spin and darkspin spectroscopy in diamond. Nat. Phys. 1, 94–98 (2005).
Bauch, E. et al. Ultralong dephasing times in solidstate spin ensembles via quantum control. Phys. Rev. X 8, 031025 (2018).
Landstrass, M. et al. Device properties of homoepitaxially grown diamond. Diam. Relat. Mater. 2, 1033–1037 (1993).
Volpe, P.N. et al. Extreme dielectric strength in boron doped homoepitaxial diamond. Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 223501 (2010).
Kuo, C., Kwor, R. & Jones, K. Study of sputtered hfo2 thin films on silicon. Thin Solid Films 213, 257–264 (1992).
Bradac, C., Gao, W., Forneris, J., Trusheim, M. E. & Aharonovich, I. Quantum nanophotonics with group iv defects in diamond. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–13 (2019).
De Santis, L., Trusheim, M. E., Chen, K. C. & Englund, D. R. Investigation of the stark effect on a centrosymmetric quantum emitter in diamond. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 147402 (2021).
Meesala, S. et al. Strain engineering of the siliconvacancy center in diamond. Phys. Rev. B 97, 205444 (2018).
Yakovkina, L. et al. Preparation and properties of thin hfo2 films. Inorg. Mater. 41, 1300–1304 (2005).
Matsuda, J.I. Measurements of leakage currents and the capacitance of the storage capacitor in a single dram cell. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 41, 391–397 (1994).
Nguyen, C. et al. An integrated nanophotonic quantum register based on siliconvacancy spins in diamond. Phys. Rev. B 100, 165428 (2019).
Arcari, M. et al. Nearunity coupling efficiency of a quantum emitter to a photonic crystal waveguide. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 093603 (2014).
Rao, V. M. & Hughes, S. Single quantumdot purcell factor and β factor in a photonic crystal waveguide. Phys. Rev. B 75, 205437 (2007).
Javadi, A., Mahmoodian, S., Söllner, I. & Lodahl, P. Numerical modeling of the coupling efficiency of single quantum emitters in photoniccrystal waveguides. JOSA B 35, 514–522 (2018).
Wolters, J. et al. Enhancement of the zero phonon line emission from a single nitrogen vacancy center in a nanodiamond via coupling to a photonic crystal cavity. Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 141108 (2010).
Santori, C. et al. Nanophotonics for quantum optics using nitrogenvacancy centers in diamond. Nanotechnology 21, 274008 (2010).
Bassett, L., Heremans, F., Yale, C., Buckley, B. & Awschalom, D. Electrical tuning of single nitrogenvacancy center optical transitions enhanced by photoinduced fields. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 266403 (2011).
Fronik, T. Homogeneous Broadening of the ZeroPhonon Line in the NitrogenVacancy Centre in Diamond for All Strain Regimes. http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:0630d6c17f6440838eba0ed616855336 (2018).
Bersin, E. et al. Individual control and readout of qubits in a subdiffraction volume. npj Quantum Inf. 5, 1–6 (2019).
Rozpedek, F. et al. Nearterm quantumrepeater experiments with nitrogenvacancy centers: Overcoming the limitations of direct transmission. Phys. Rev. A 99, 052330 (2019).
Lee, Y., Bersin, E., Dahlberg, A., Wehner, S. & Englund, D. A quantum router architecture for highfidelity entanglement flows in quantum networks. npj Quantum Inf. 8, 75 (2020).
Sekiguchi, Y., Okumura, S. & Kosaka, H. Backward propagating quantum repeater protocol with multiple quantum memories. arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.04243 (2022).
Welte, S., Hacker, B., Daiss, S., Ritter, S. & Rempe, G. Cavity carving of atomic bell states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 210503 (2017).
Asadi, F. K., Wein, S. & Simon, C. Cavityassisted controlled phaseflip gates. Phys. Rev. A 102, 013703 (2020).
Barrett, S. D. & Kok, P. Efficient highfidelity quantum computation using matter qubits and linear optics. Phys. Rev. A 71, 060310 (2005).
Yu, Y. et al. Entanglement of two quantum memories via fibres over dozens of kilometres. Nature 578, 240–245 (2020).
Le Jeannic, H. et al. Highefficiency wsi superconducting nanowire singlephoton detectors for quantum state engineering in the near infrared. Opt. Lett. 41, 5341–5344 (2016).
O’Faolain, L. et al. Loss engineered slow light waveguides. Opt. Express 18, 27627–27638 (2010).
Pfaff, W. et al. Demonstration of entanglementbymeasurement of solidstate qubits. Nat. Phys. 9, 29–33 (2013).
Degen, M. et al. Entanglement of dark electronnuclear spin defects in diamond. Nat. Commun. 12, 1–10 (2021).
Seyringer, D. In 2012 14th International Conference on Transparent Optical Networks (ICTON) 1–4 (IEEE, 2012).
Harris, N. C. et al. Quantum transport simulations in a programmable nanophotonic processor. Nat. Photon. 11, 447–452 (2017).
Joo, J., Park, J. & Kim, G. Costeffective 2 × 2 silicon nitride machzehnder interferometric (mzi) thermooptic switch. IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 30, 740–743 (2018).
Thomson, D., Hu, Y., Reed, G. & Fedeli, J.M. Low loss mmi couplers for high performance mzi modulators. IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 22, 1485–1487 (2010).
Jones, C., De Greve, K. & Yamamoto, Y. A highspeed optical link to entangle quantum dots. arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1310.4609 (2013).
Chen, K. C. et al. Zeroaddedloss entangled photon multiplexing for groundand spacebased quantum networks. arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2206.03670 (2022).
Barclay, P. E., Painter, O., Santori, C., Fu, K.M. & Beausoleil, R. G. Quantum Electronics and Laser Science Conference (Optical Society of America, 2008).
Wan, N. H. et al. Largescale integration of artificial atoms in hybrid photonic circuits. Nature 583, 226–231 (2020).
Liu, X. et al. Ald of hafnium oxide thin films from tetrakis (ethylmethylamino) hafnium and ozone. J. Electrochem. Soc. 152, G213 (2005).
Scarpelli, L. et al. 99% beta factor and directional coupling of quantum dots to fast light in photonic crystal waveguides determined by spectral imaging. Phys. Rev. B 100, 035311 (2019).
Kim, D. et al. A cmosintegrated quantum sensor based on nitrogen–vacancy centres. Nat. Electron. 2, 284–289 (2019).
Abel, S. et al. Large pockels effect in microand nanostructured barium titanate integrated on silicon. Nat. Mater. 18, 42–47 (2019).
Rodgers, L. V. et al. Materials challenges for quantum technologies based on color centers in diamond. MRS Bull. 46, 623–633 (2021).
Faraon, A., Santori, C., Huang, Z., Acosta, V. M. & Beausoleil, R. G. Coupling of nitrogenvacancy centers to photonic crystal cavities in monocrystalline diamond. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 033604 (2012).
OrphalKobin, L. et al. Optically coherent nitrogenvacancy defect centers in diamond nanostructures. arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.056055 (2022).
Chakravarthi, S., Pederson, C., Kazi, Z., Ivanov, A. & Fu, K.M. C. Impact of surface and laserinduced noise on the spectral stability of implanted nitrogenvacancy centers in diamond. Phys. Rev. B 104, 085425 (2021).
Acosta, V. et al. Dynamic stabilization of the optical resonances of single nitrogenvacancy centers in diamond. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 206401 (2012).
Ruf, M., Weaver, M. J., van Dam, S. B. & Hanson, R. Resonant excitation and purcell enhancement of coherent nitrogenvacancy centers coupled to a fabryperot microcavity. Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, 024049 (2021).
Sipahigil, A. et al. An integrated diamond nanophotonics platform for quantumoptical networks. Science 354, 847–850 (2016).
Falk, A. L. et al. Electrically and mechanically tunable electron spins in silicon carbide color centers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 187601 (2014).
SafaviNaeini, A. H. et al. Twodimensional phononicphotonic band gap optomechanical crystal cavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
Johnson, S. G. & Joannopoulos, J. D. Blockiterative frequencydomain methods for maxwell’s equations in a planewave basis. Opt. Express 8, 173–190 (2001).
Acknowledgements
H.W. acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation Center for Ultracold Atoms (NSF CUA). M.E.T. acknowledges support through the Army Research Laboratory ENIAC Distinguished Postdoctoral Fellowship. L.K. acknowledges support through an appointment to the Intelligence Community Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, administered by Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. H.R. acknowledges support from the National Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) fellowship and NSF CUA. D.R.E. acknowledges support from the Bose Research Fellowship, the Army Research Office Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative (ARO MURI) biological transduction program, and the NSF CUA. We thank Ian Christen, Dr. Hyeongrak Choi, Kevin C. Chen and Dr. Lorenzo de Santis for helpful discussions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
M.E.T. and D.R.E. conceived the project. H.W. and M.E.T made the design and the quantum repeater calculation. H.W. performed the simulations and models. L.K. assisted in optical simulations. H.R. assisted in strainbased FPSA design. H.W. and M.E.T. prepared the manuscript. All authors discussed results and revised the manuscript. M.E.T. and D.R.E. supervised the project.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature Communications thanks Hideo Kosaka and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, H., Trusheim, M.E., Kim, L. et al. Field programmable spin arrays for scalable quantum repeaters. Nat Commun 14, 704 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467023360988
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467023360988
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.