Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator

Abstract

The stable operation of quantum computers will rely on error correction, in which single quantum bits of information are stored redundantly in the Hilbert space of a larger system. Such encoded qubits are commonly based on arrays of many physical qubits, but can also be realized using a single higher-dimensional quantum system, such as a harmonic oscillator1,2,3. In such a system, a powerful encoding has been devised based on periodically spaced superpositions of position eigenstates4,5,6. Various proposals have been made for realizing approximations to such states, but these have thus far remained out of reach7,8,9,10,11. Here we demonstrate such an encoded qubit using a superposition of displaced squeezed states of the harmonic motion of a single trapped 40Ca+ ion, controlling and measuring the mechanical oscillator through coupling to an ancillary internal-state qubit12. We prepare and reconstruct logical states with an average squared fidelity of 87.3 ± 0.7 per cent. Also, we demonstrate a universal logical single-qubit gate set, which we analyse using process tomography. For Pauli gates we reach process fidelities of about 97 per cent, whereas for continuous rotations we use gate teleportation and achieve fidelities of approximately 89 per cent. This control method opens a route for exploring continuous variable error correction as well as hybrid quantum information schemes using both discrete and continuous variables13. The code states also have direct applications in quantum sensing, allowing simultaneous measurement of small displacements in both position and momentum14,15.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Grid state encoding and control.
Fig. 2: Logical readout.
Fig. 3: Arbitrary single-qubit operations.
Fig. 4: Process tomography of logical operations, characterized by the χ matrix.

Data availability

The data that support the plots within this paper and other findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request.

References

  1. 1.

    Chuang, I. L., Leung, D. W. & Yamamoto, Y. Bosonic quantum codes for amplitude damping. Phys. Rev. A 56, 1114–1125 (1997).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Michael, M. H. et al. New class of quantum error-correcting codes for a bosonic mode. Phys. Rev. X 6, 031006 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Lund, A. P., Ralph, T. C. & Haselgrove, H. L. Fault-tolerant linear optical quantum computing with small-amplitude coherent states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 030503 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Gottesman, D., Kitaev, A. & Preskill, J. Encoding a qubit in an oscillator. Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Albert, V. V. et al. Performance and structure of single-mode bosonic codes. Phys. Rev. A 97, 032346 (2018).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Noh, K., Albert, V. V. & Jiang, L. Improved quantum capacity bounds of Gaussian loss channels and achievable rates with Gottesman–Kitaev–Preskill codes. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.07271 (2018).

  7. 7.

    Travaglione, B. C. & Milburn, G. J. Preparing encoded states in an oscillator. Phys. Rev. A 66, 052322 (2002).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Pirandola, S., Mancini, S., Vitali, D. & Tombesi, P. Continuous variable encoding by ponderomotive interaction. Eur. Phys. J. D 37, 283–290 (2006).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Vasconcelos, H. M., Sanz, L. & Glancy, S. All-optical generation of states for “encoding a qubit in an oscillator”. Opt. Lett. 35, 3261–3263 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Terhal, B. M. & Weigand, D. Encoding a qubit into a cavity mode in circuit QED using phase estimation. Phys. Rev. A 93, 012315 (2016).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Motes, K. R., Baragiola, B. Q., Gilchrist, A. & Menicucci, N. C. Encoding qubits into oscillators with atomic ensembles and squeezed light. Phys. Rev. A 95, 053819 (2017).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Flühmann, C., Negnevitsky, V., Marinelli, M. & Home, J. P. Sequential modular position and momentum measurements of a trapped ion mechanical oscillator. Phys. Rev. X 8, 021001 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Andersen, U. L., Neergaard-Nielsen, J. S., van Loock, P. & Furusawa, A. Hybrid discrete- and continuous-variable quantum information. Nat. Phys. 11, 713 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Duivenvoorden, K., Terhal, B. M. & Weigand, D. Single-mode displacement sensor. Phys. Rev. A 95, 012305 (2017).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Neumann, J. V. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1996).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Devitt, S. J., Munro, W. J. & Nemoto, K. Quantum error correction for beginners. Rep. Prog. Phys. 76, 076001 (2013).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Heeres, R. W. et al. Implementing a universal gate set on a logical qubit encoded in an oscillator. Nat. Commun. 8, 94 (2017).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Ofek, N. et al. Extending the lifetime of a quantum bit with error correction in superconducting circuits. Nature 536, 441–445 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Haljan, P. C., Brickman, K.-A., Deslauriers, L., Lee, P. J. & Monroe, C. Spin-dependent forces on trapped ions for phase-stable quantum gates and entangled states of spin and motion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 153602 (2005).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Schleich, W. P. WKB and Berry Phase 171–188 (Wiley-VCH, Berlin, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Glancy, S. & Knill, E. Error analysis for encoding a qubit in an oscillator. Phys. Rev. A 73, 012325 (2006).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Kienzler, D. et al. Quantum harmonic oscillator state synthesis by reservoir engineering. Science 347, 53–56 (2015).

    ADS  MathSciNet  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Kienzler, D. et al. Observation of quantum interference between separated mechanical oscillator wave packets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 140402 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Lo, H.-Y. et al. Spin-motion entanglement and state diagnosis with squeezed oscillator wavepackets. Nature 521, 336–339 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Wallentowitz, S. & Vogel, W. Reconstruction of the quantum mechanical state of a trapped ion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 2932–2935 (1995).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Leibfried, D. et al. Experimental determination of the motional quantum state of a trapped atom. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4281–4285 (1996).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Knill, E., Laflamme, R. & Zurek, W. H. Resilient quantum computation: error models and thresholds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 454, 365–384 (1998).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Nielsen, M. A. & Chuang, I. L. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2010).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Brown, K. R. et al. Coupled quantized mechanical oscillators. Nature 471, 196–199 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Harlander, M., Lechner, R., Brownnutt, M., Blatt, R. & Hänsel, W. Trapped-ion antennae for the transmission of quantum information. Nature 471, 200–203 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Toyoda, K., Hiji, R., Noguchi, A. & Urabe, S. Hong–Ou–Mandel interference of two phonons in trapped ions. Nature 527, 74 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Fukui, K., Tomita, A., Okamoto, A. & Fujii, K. High-threshold fault-tolerant quantum computation with analog quantum error correction. Phys. Rev. X 8, 021054 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Vuillot, C., Asasi, H., Wang, Y., Pryadko, L. P. & Terhal, B. M. Quantum error correction with the Toric-GKP code. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1810.00047 (2018).

  34. 34.

    Ketterer, A. Modular Variables in Quantum Information. PhD thesis, Univ. Sorbonne Paris Cité and Univ. Paris Diderot (2016).

  35. 35.

    Kienzler, D. Quantum Harmonic Oscillator State Synthesis by Reservoir Engineering. PhD thesis, ETH Zürich (2015).

  36. 36.

    Wineland, D. J. et al. Experimental issues in coherent quantum-state manipulation of trapped atomic ions. J. Res. Natl Inst. Stand. Technol. 103, 259–328 (1998).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Kienzler, D. et al. Quantum harmonic oscillator state control in a squeezed Fock basis. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 033602 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Wolf, F. et al. Motional Fock states for quantum-enhanced amplitude and phase measurements with trapped ions. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.01875 (2018).

  39. 39.

    Gerritsma, R. et al. Quantum simulation of the Klein paradox with trapped ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 060503 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Zähringer, F. et al. Realization of a quantum random walk with one and two trapped ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 100503 (2010).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Gerritsma, R. et al. Quantum simulation of the Dirac equation. Nature 463, 68–71 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R. J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap (Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 1993).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    James, D. F. V., Kwiat, P. G., Munro, W. J. & White, A. G. Measurement of qubits. Phys. Rev. A 64, 052312 (2001).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Bhandari, R. & Peters, N. A. On the general constraints in single qubit quantum process tomography. Sci. Rep. 6, 26004 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Kienzler, L. de Clercq and H.-Y. Lo for important contributions to the apparatus. We acknowledge support from the Swiss National Science Foundation through the National Centre of Competence in Research for Quantum Science and Technology (QSIT) grant 51NF40-160591. We acknowledge support from the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant no. 200020_165555/1. K.M. was supported by an ETH Zürich Postdoctoral Fellowship 17-1-FEL050. The research is partly based upon work supported by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), via the US Army Research Office grant W911NF-16-1-0070. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of the ODNI, IARPA or the US Government. The US Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright annotation thereon. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the US Army Research Office.

Reviewer information

Nature thanks Alessandro Ferraro and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Experimental data were taken and analysed by C.F., using an apparatus with significant contributions from V.N., M.M., C.F., T.L.N. and K.M. The paper was written by C.F. and J.P.H., with input from all authors. Experiments were conceived by C.F. and J.P.H.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to C. Flühmann or J. P. Home.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 Calibration techniques in phase space.

Here we show how the required properties of the tickling pulse are determined (‘calibrated’) and the use of the tickling pulse for motional frequency calibrations. a, Matching of the tickling pulse to the SDF pulse (see Methods for nomenclature). The squeezed ion motional state (dashed state labelled 0) is displaced using an SDF together with two π/2 internal state rotations (SDFz). This realizes the displaced squeezed state 1. A subsequent tickling pulse is calibrated in order to revert the displacement implemented by the laser. After this shift the oscillator is in state 2. Whether or not the squeezed state returns to the squeezed vacuum can be probed using the squeezed basis analogue of the red sideband22. Shown is the case of a laser displacement along the squeezed axis, which enhances sensitivity for the tickling coupling strength. b, Similarly, a laser displacement perpendicular to the squeezed axis is used to calibrate the direction of the tickling pulse. c, Motional frequency calibration. The ion is ground state cooled (0), then a coherent state (1) is created by a first tickling pulse. The state evolves freely during the wait time T and rotates by an angle , with δ the detuning from the angular motional frequency ωm. A second tickling pulse inverts the first displacement. Because of the detuning, the final state (3) does not return to the ground state, which can be detected applying a red sideband probe pulse.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Example of a pulse sequence.

This pulse sequence is used during process tomography of the T-gate. The blue line shows laser pulses based on the 397 nm laser used for cooling and fluorescence detection of the internal states. The red line shows manipulations using the 729 nm laser used for SDF pulses as well as carrier rotations, while the black line denotes tickling pulses implemented using an RF voltage. The upper row shows the sequence used for preparing \({\left|0\right\rangle }_{L}\), including initial cooling, squeezed state preparation (‘squeezed pumping’) and modular variable measurements (‘Mod(l)’). The lower row shows first the implementation of \({\hat{U}}_{L}^{X}({\rm{\pi }}/2,{\rm{\pi }}/2)\) by gate teleportation (creating \({|{\Phi }_{+}\rangle }_{L}\)), followed by application of a teleported T-gate (‘\(\hat{T}\)-gate’) and subsequently the readout of the states.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Grid qubit lifetime measurements.

af, States are prepared (left column, \({\left|0\right\rangle }_{L}\); right column, \({\left|+\right\rangle }_{L}\)), and after a variable wait time the state is read out. The resulting measurement data (blue points with s.e.m. error bars) are fitted with an exponential decay Aet/T (solid line). For prepared state \({\left|0\right\rangle }_{L}\): a, readout of \({\hat{Z}}_{L}\), from which we find T = 3.7 ± 0.2 ms; c, readout of \({\hat{S}}_{X}\) with T = 0.8 ± 0.1 ms; and e, readout of \({\hat{S}}_{Z}\) with T = 1.1 ± 0.1 ms. For prepared state \({\left|+\right\rangle }_{L}\): b, readout of \({\hat{X}}_{L}\) with T = 3.6 ± 0.3 ms; d, readout of \({\hat{S}}_{X}\) with T = 1.0 ± 0.1 ms; f, readout of \({\hat{S}}_{Z}\) with T = 0.7 ± 0.1 ms.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Two qubit gate implemented in two modes of a single trapped ion.

This circuit implements \({\hat{\sigma }}_{L}^{i}\)-controlled \(\pm {\hat{\sigma }}_{L}^{j}\) operations between two grid state qubits \(\left|{Q}_{1}\right\rangle \) and \(\left|{Q}_{2}\right\rangle \) mediated by one internal ancillary qubit \(\left|0\right\rangle \leftrightarrow \left|1\right\rangle \). The required operations are shown in the left circuit, while on the right the equivalent logical operation is shown. The sign of the operation is determined by the ancillary qubit readout. See Methods for details.

Extended Data Table 1 Creation of code states

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Flühmann, C., Nguyen, T.L., Marinelli, M. et al. Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator. Nature 566, 513–517 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0960-6

Download citation

Further reading

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.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing