Title goes here Building a superconducting quantum computer with the surface code Matteo Mariantoni Fall INTRIQ meeting, November 5th & 6th 2013 the DQM lab team • Matteo Mariantoni Principal Investigator Thomas G. McConkey Doctoral Student Corey Rae H. McRae Doctoral Student Collaborators: 1) Prof. Michael J. Hartmann Heriot Watt University 2) Prof. Frederick W. Strauch Williams College Daryoush Shiri 3) Prof. Adrian Lupaşcu Postdoctoral Fellow IQC 4) Prof. Christopher M. Wilson IQC 5) Prof. Zbig R. Wasilewski WIN 6) Dr. Austin G. Fowler John R. Rinehart Carolyn “Cary” T. Earnest Doctoral Student UC Santa Barbara Doctoral Student 7) Prof. David G. Cory IQC 8) Prof. Guo-Xing Miao IQC 9) Prof. Roger G. Melko UW Jérémy Béjanin 10) Sadegh Raeisi Master’s Student Yousef Rohanizadegan IQC Research Assistant 11) Yuval R. Sanders IQC lab virtual walkthrough DR the lab is being setup in these very days; it will be up and running by February 2014 photo credit BlueFors Cryogenics Oy lab real walkthrough the lab is being setup in these very days; it will be up and running by February 2014 on the edge nano/micro meter photo credit – M. Mariantoni and E. Lucero University of California Santa Barbara space on the edge milli kelvin photo credit – BlueFors Cryogenics Oy temperature on the edge giga hertz photo credit – M. Mariantoni and E. Lucero frequency time superconducting quantum circuits • LC resonator C L Hˆ LC 2 2 ˆ ˆ Q 2L 2C superconducting quantum circuits • LC resonator ~ 7 GHz 4 3 2 1 0 superconducting quantum circuits • transmission-line resonator dielectric material lres superconducting quantum circuits • coplanar waveguide resonator Ca Cb T1 ~ 5 ms T2 ~ 2T1 M. Mariantoni et al., Nature Phys. 7, 287 (2011) superconducting quantum circuits • qubit L C Josephson junction ˆ 2→ nonlinearity ˆ ˆ2 Q Hˆ Q EJ cos 2 2C 2L 0 superconducting quantum circuits • qubit dan ~ 200 MHz ~ 6.8 GHz ~ 7 GHz f e g superconducting quantum circuits • qubit junction capacitor C inductor L T1 ~ 500 ns T2 ~ 150 ns M. Mariantoni et al., Nature Phys. 7, 287 (2011) superconducting quantum circuits • resonator + qubit + control X,Y (, /2); Z junction capacitor C inductor L resonator + qubit g(C ) ~ 100 MHz 10 ns A. Blais, R.-S. Huang, A. Wallraff, bS.M. Girvin, and R.J. Schoelkopf, Phys. Rev. A 69, M. Mariantoni et al., Nature 431, Phys.162 7, 287 (2011) 062320 (2004); A. Wallraff et al., Nature (London) (2004) one-qubit pulses and one-qubit quantum errors • pulses 1. 𝑋 𝜋 (𝑅𝑥𝜋 ) energizes the qubit from g to e 𝜋/2 2. 𝑋 𝜋/2 (𝑅𝑥 ) prepares the qubit in state g − e 3. 𝑍 (𝑅𝑧 ) shifts the qubit by a certain phase, 𝑒 𝑖𝜙 e • errors 1. bit-flip (𝑋) brings the qubit from e to g 𝐼 + 𝜀 𝑋, 𝜀 ≪ 1 2. phase-flip (𝑍) shifts the qubit from g + e to g − e 𝐼 + 𝜀𝑍 • any error 𝑈𝑒 = 𝛼 𝐼 + 𝛽𝑋 + 𝛾𝑌 + 𝛿 𝑍 P.W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A 52, 2493 (1995) create, write, re-create, zero, read entanglement M1 B Q1 Z1 Z2 Q2 M2 M. Mariantoni et al., Science 334, 61 (2011) i the CZ- gate • qutrit qubit the CZ- gate • qutrit phase qubit qutrit the CZ- gate • qutrit-resonator interaction the CZ- gate • qutrit-resonator interaction the CZ- gate • qutrit-resonator interaction g1 e0 : gQ1B e1 f0 : ~ gQ1B the CZ- gate • qutrit-resonator interaction g1 e0 : gQ1B dQ B 0 ~ e1 f0 : gQ1B 1 semi-resonant dQ B 0 1 resonant the CZ- gate • two-qubit CZ-f gate dQ B 0 1 semi-resonant dQ B 0 1 resonant the CZ- gate • two-qubit CZ-f gate dQ B 0 1 semi-resonant control 1 0 Uˆ 0 0 0 0 e i 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 target dQ B 0 1 resonant THEORY: F. W. Strauch et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 167005 (2003) G. Haack,…, M.M.,... et al., Phys. Rev. B 82, 024514 (2010) EXPERIMENT: L. DiCarlo et al., Nature (London) 460, 240-244 (2009) T. Yamamoto ,…, M.M.,... et al., Phys. Rev. B 82, 184515 (2010) the CZ- gate • CZ- gate truth table gg 0 ge eg 0 0 ee π control 1 0 Uˆ 0 0 0 0 e i 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 target dQ B 0 1 semi-resonant dQ B 0 1 resonant the CZ- gate • two-qubit CZ-f gate dQ B 0 1 semi-resonant dQ B 0 1 1 0 Uˆ 0 0 0 0 e i 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 resonant the CZ- gate • two-qubit CZ-f gate 1 0 Uˆ 0 0 0 0 e if 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 dQ B 0 1 semi-resonant dQ B 0 1 1 0 Uˆ 0 0 0 0 e i 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 resonant M. Mariantoni et al., Science 334, 61 (2011) the CZ- gate • two-qubit CZ-f gate dQ B 0 1 semi-resonant dQ B 0 1 1 0 Uˆ 0 0 0 0 e i 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 resonant M. Mariantoni et al., Science 334, 61 (2011) the CZ- gate • f-meter: Generalized Ramsey (a) the CZ- gate • f-meter: Generalized Ramsey (a) i. compensate dynamic phase ii. varying zcmp Ramsey fringe the CZ- gate • f-meter: Generalized Ramsey (b) the CZ- gate • f-meter: Generalized Ramsey (a-b) the CZ- gate • f-meter: Generalized Ramsey (a-b) the CZ- gate • f-meter: Generalized Ramsey (a-b) f = 0.01 f = /2 f= the CZ- gate • process tomography fidelity ~70% fidelity ~60% qubit T1~500 ns, T2~150 ns superconducting surface code A.G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J.M. Martinis, and A.N. Cleland, Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012) ~ 50 pages of details 2D lattice with nearest neighbor interactions A.G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J.M. Martinis, and A.N. Cleland, Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012) ~ 50 pages of details surface code • data and syndrome qubit data syndrome → measured surface code • face and vertex A.Yu. Kitaev, Annals of Physics 303, 2 (2003) stabilizers • Z-stabilizer 1 2 3 4 stabilizers • Z-stabilizer 1 zeroing gate 1 3 2 g 3 2 4 4 stabilizers • Z-stabilizer 1 projects 1 3 2 MˆI z 3 2 4 4 1 Zˆ1Zˆ2Zˆ3Zˆ 4 Z1234 Z1234 1 stabilizers • X-stabilizer 1 projects 1 3 2 M Hˆ z 3 2 4 4 1 Xˆ 1Xˆ 2 Xˆ 3 Xˆ 4 X1234 X1234 1 stabilizers one qubit 𝐼 + 𝜀𝑋 𝐼 + 𝜀𝑍 detected by repeatedly measuring the qubit with combined 𝑋 and 𝑍 measurements 𝑋, 𝑍 ≠ 0 qubit state destroyed stabilizers pair of qubits, 𝑎 and 𝑏 𝐼𝑎 + 𝜀𝑋𝑎 , 𝐼𝑏 + 𝜀𝑋𝑏 𝐼𝑎 + 𝜀 𝑍𝑎 , 𝐼𝑏 + 𝜀𝑍𝑏 detected by repeatedly measuring the pair of qubits with 𝑋𝑎 𝑋𝑏 and 𝑍𝑎 𝑍𝑏 measurements stabilizers pair of qubits, 𝑎 and 𝑏 𝐼𝑎 + 𝜀𝑋𝑎 , 𝐼𝑏 + 𝜀𝑋𝑏 𝐼𝑎 + 𝜀 𝑍𝑎 , 𝐼𝑏 + 𝜀𝑍𝑏 detected by repeatedly measuring the pair of qubits with 𝑋𝑎 𝑋𝑏 and 𝑍𝑎 𝑍𝑏 measurements stabilizers 𝐼𝑏 + 𝜀𝑋𝑏 error detection event BUT cannot be distinguished from an 𝐼𝑎 + 𝜀 𝑋𝑎 error! stabilizers • quiescent state +1 -1 stabilizers • quiescent state -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 quantum error detection time • quiescent state -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 quantum error detection • quantum error detection time bit-flip error Xˆ 2 +1 -1 +1 Xˆ 2 -1 -1 +1 -1 +1 Zˆ1Zˆ 2Zˆ3Zˆ 4 Xˆ 2 Z1234 Xˆ 2 quantum error detection • protected memory bit-flip error Xˆ 2 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 Xˆ 2 -1 +1 +1 +1 +1 -1 Zˆ1 Zˆ1Zˆ2Zˆ3Zˆ 4 Xˆ 2 Z1234 Xˆ 2 +1 -1 -1 phase-flip error Zˆ1 Xˆ 1Xˆ 2 Xˆ 3 Xˆ 4 Zˆ1 X1234 Zˆ1 -1 time 1) 2) 3) any error Uˆ e boundaries measurement errors “minimum weight matching” → polynomial error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on first qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on first qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on second qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on second qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on third qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on third qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on fourth qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • quiescent state -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on last qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • Xˆ error on third qubit -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 error chains and logical qubits • back to original quiescent state -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 +1 +1 -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 -1 +1 +1 +1 -1 fault tolerance – surface codes A.G. Fowler et al., Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012) • physical → logical qubit = error rate 10-14 fault tolerance – surface codes • physical qubits → logical qubit = error rate 10-14 1) nearest neighbor interactions 2) CNOT physical gates • fast ~ 100 ns • with F ≥ 99 % 3) readout • fast ~ 100 ns • with F ≥ 90 % 4) interface with classical electronics 5) overhead • proof-of-concept → 3/5 physical qubits • quantum memory → 1010 = 102 physical qubits • Shor → 103 to 104 physical qubits fault tolerance – surface codes 1) CNOT physical gates • Xmon lifetime T1 ~ 50 ms • Tgate ~ 50 ns = 0.05 ms → F exp(- Tgate / T1) = exp(- 0.05 ms / 50 ms) ~ 99.9 % Xmon R. Barends et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 080502 (2013) R. A. Barends Megrant et al., App. Phys. Lett. 99, 100,113507 113510(2011) (2012) fault tolerance – surface codes • physical qubits → logical qubit = error rate 10-14 1) nearest neighbor interactions 2) CNOT physical gates • fast ~ 100 ns • with F ≥ 99 % 3) readout • fast ~ 100 ns • with F ≥ 90 % 4) interface with classical electronics 5) overhead • proof-of-concept → 3/5 physical qubits • quantum memory → 1010 = 102 physical qubits • Shor → 103 to 104 physical qubits fault tolerance – surface codes 2) readout • readout time r ~ 100 ns • F > 90 % R. Vijay et al., Nature (London) 490, 77 (2012) fault tolerance – surface codes • physical qubits → logical qubit = error rate 10-14 1) nearest neighbor interactions 2) CNOT physical gates • fast ~ 100 ns • with F ≥ 99 % 3) readout • fast ~ 100 ns • with F ≥ 90 % 4) interface with classical electronics 5) overhead • proof-of-concept → 3/5 physical qubits • quantum memory → 1010 = 102 physical qubits • Shor → 103 to 104 physical qubits perspective • surface code proof-of-concept → 3/5 physical qubits → 3-4 years • quantum memory → 102 physical qubits → 8-9 years • Shor to factor a 2000 bit number in 24 h with 1 nuclear power plant → 300106 physical qubits on the best classical super-cluster: many times the age of the universe and virtually infinite power resonator-qubit 2D lattice Z R Q,| B … A,|g R B A,|g R unit cell … … … resonator-qubit 2D lattice higher isolation → OFF coupling Q,| B A,|g B Q,| … … … … resonator-qubit 2D lattice R Q,| B higher isolation → OFF coupling A,|g encoding → multiple measurement R B R A,|g … … … resonator-qubit 2D lattice Z higher isolation → OFF coupling Q,| encoding → multiple measurement zero leakage to third state … … … resonator-qubit 2D lattice Z R Q,| B higher isolation → OFF coupling A,|g encoding → multiple measurement R B R zero and/or store A,|g … … … see also D.P. DiVincenzo, Phys. Scr., T 137, 014020 (2009)