ISSCC 2004 / SESSION 16 / TD: EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES AND CIRCUITS / 16.

16.6

Superconducting Quantum Storage and Processing

M.H.S. Amin, M. Grajcar1,2, E. Il'ichev1, A. Izmalkov1, Alec Maassen van den Brink, G. Rose, A. Yu. Smirnov, A.M. Zagoskin
D-Wave Systems, Vancouver, Canada 1 Institute for Physical High Technology, Jena, Germany 2 Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia Quantum computers solve certain classes of problems exponentially faster and with exponentially less hardware than any possible conventional computer [1]. These advantages arise from two key quantum mechanical effects. The first is superposition, in which the quantum bits (qubits) simultaneously exist in two different states, associated with 0 and 1 (cf. Fig. 16.6.1). The second is entanglement, a type of multi-qubit superposition, in which the information stored in different qubits is correlated more than is possible classically. Superposition and entanglement are fragile; interaction with the environment destroys both after a decoherence time . Maximizing is a major goal of qubit engineering. It is known that if ~104 quantum gate operations are performed within then, under certain conditions, arbitrarily long calculations may be performed using quantum error correction techniques [1]. This paper is a preliminary report of two-qubit entangled states, in two inductively coupled flux qubits interacting with a high-quality LC circuit. Of the various technologies for implementing quantum computation, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance [3], the first and still most successful technology, is known to be intrinsically restricted to ~10 qubits. Solidstate qubits are scalable and are accessed and controlled individually, but suffer from increased decoherence due to interaction with electrons, phonons, and electromagnetic noise. The most successful solution to date is to use superconducting materials. Superconductors have gapped energy spectra; they intrinsically behave as high-pass filters removing much of the decohering low-frequency noise. Recent experiments have demonstrated quantum behavior in four broad categories of superconducting qubits (Fig. 16.6.2) [4]. (a) Charge qubits: the quantum states differ by a charge 2e of a small island (the region between the two tunnel junctions in Fig. 16.6.2a). (b) Hybrid qubits have logical states similar to those of charge qubits, but the working point and readout method are designed so as to reduce noise (Fig. 16.6.2b). (c) Phase qubits use two low-energy quantum states of a current-biased tunnel junction (Fig. 16.6.2c). (d) Flux qubits [5,6]: two different directions of persistent current in a small ring (Fig. 16.6.2d) form the two qubit states. Using a high-quality LC circuit for readout, a = 2.5s was reported for the latter [6]. Figure 16.6.3 illustrates the flux qubit investigated in this paper. It consists of an aluminum loop interrupted by three tunnel junctions [5]. When the loop is threaded by an external flux e of nearly half a flux quantum (0/2 10-15 Wb), a persistent current flows either clock- or counterclockwise; these are considered as classical 0 and 1 states. They are the minima of the system's bistable potential energy (a double well as in Fig. 16.6.1). When the loop is very small, the state of the system is also a superposition of 0 and 1 (Fig. 16.6.1) because of the wave nature of quantum mechanics. The loop's effective inductance depends on the junctions as well as on the geometry, and is nonlinear and strongly enhanced in the superposition state [7,8]. The enhancement occurs only at e 0/2, where one expects a sudden change in the magnetic behavior of the system. This is observed at very low temperatures (10-100 millikelvin), where quantum effects dominate. Figure 16.6.4a shows a two-qubit device fabricated for the measurement of entanglement. Two junctions in each qubit have

areas ~0.1m2 while the third ones are 20~30% smaller. The qubits share a common leg and are magnetically coupled to each other as well as to a niobium pancake coil with 40 windings (LT 90.9 nH) in parallel with a capacitance (CT 470 pF), forming an LC circuit with a resonant frequency of 24.35 MHz and quality factor 1200. A separate onchip niobium wire produces a field gradient. The circuit diagram is shown in Fig. 16.6.4b. The current source I(t) provides both dc and ac components. The voltage of the LC circuit is amplified and measured. Because of the magnetic coupling, its effective inductance is influenced by the qubits, in particular near e 0/2. This shift is seen in the phase difference between the output voltage and I(t). Figure 16.6.5 shows the measured inductance L for one of the two-qubit samples vs = (e1+e2)/20. The dips represent the shifts in L = LT-L when the qubits are in superposition states. Because of geometrical asymmetries, they occur at slightly dif ferent values of . Increasing the temperature reduces the dip height, but leaves the width unchanged, both as expected. Applying a current through the biasing wire moves the dips closer to each other or further apart. A signature of entanglement is seen when the two dips overlap. If the qubits are uncoupled, the resulting dip is a simple sum (with the same width but twice the height). If the qubits are entangled, on the other hand, the dip should be smaller than the sum. Results of simulations using the parameters of Fig. 16.6.4a are presented in Fig. 16.6.6. The central dip is 8% smaller than the sum of the individual dips. Figure 16.6.7 shows a preliminary measurement of this sample. The central feature was measured by bringing the side-dips into overlap using the biasing wire. In agreement with the entanglement picture, the signal is smaller than the sum of the two side-dips. A quantum gate operation reversibly transforms the state of a set of qubits through a quantum-mechanical (unitary) evolution. As the classical NAND gate, which is logically complete, two single-qubit gates (Rotation and Bias) and one entangling two-qubit gate suffice for any quantum operation [2]. At e 0/2, coherent tunneling between a qubit's two wells occurs, which is used as a Rotation gate. Away from 0/2, the relative phase between the two states evolves with time, generating a Bias gate. The permanent inductive coupling between two qubits is an entangling gate (Controlled-Phase) completing a universal set of operations. The qubits are initialized by biasing them sufficiently away from 0/2 and making them relax to the lowest energy state. Reading out the final state is done by measuring the qubits' magnetic moment using a sensitive magnetometer. This technology platform is currently being used to create 4qubit registers capable of running simple algorithms. With the current pace of progress, a quantum computer with 30 superconducting qubits, competitive with supercomputers for limited classes of problems, is achievable within 5-10 years.
References: [1] Nielsen, M., Chuang, I. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000). [2] Dodd, J.L. et al., Universal Quantum Computation and Simulation Using any Entangling Hamiltonian and Local Unitaries, Phys. Rev. A 65, 040301 (R) (2002). [3] Chuang, I.L. et al., Bulk Spin Quantum Computation: Towards LargeScale Quantum Computation, ISSCC Dig. Tech. Papers, p. 96, Feb. 1998. [4] Leggett, A.J., Superconducting Qubits-a Major Roadblock Dissolved?, Science 296, 861 (2002). [5] Mooij, J.E. et al., Josephson Persistent-Current Qubit, Science 285, 1036 (1999). [6] Il'ichev, E. et al., Continuous Monitoring of Rabi Oscillations in a Josephson Flux Qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 097906 (2003). [7] Greenberg, Ya.S. et al., Low-Frequency Characterization of Quantum Tunneling in Flux Qubits, Phys. Rev. B 66, 214525 (2002). [8] Grajcar, M. et al., Low-Frequency Measurement of the Tunneling Amplitude in a Flux Qubit, to appear in Phys. Rev. B Rapid Communications.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

ISSCC 2004 / February 17, 2004 / Salon 10-15 / 4:15 PM

Figure 16.6.1: In quantum mechanics, objects are described by waves. A standing wave in a double well potential can be viewed as a representation of a qubit state. Top figures show classical 0 and 1, where the wave is localized in one of the wells. Bottom figures represent superposition states.

Figure 16.6.2: Schematic diagram of four different superconducting qubits. The X signs denote the tunnel junctions (see also Fig. 16.6.3).

Figure 16.6.3: Left: a flux qubit made of an aluminum loop with three tunnel junctions. Right: schematic diagram for the same qubit.

Figure 16.6.4: (a) Electron micrograph of one of the samples. The two thin loops in the center are the qubits, see Fig. 16.6.3. (b) Measurement setup. The flux qubits are inductively coupled to an LC circuit. A flux e 0/2 is applied to the qubits) via the inductor and the biasing wire Ib. |)

G Figure 16.6.5: Measured L vs average flux at different temperatures. Temperature decreases from the top to the bottom curve in the dips.

Figure 16.6.6: Numerical simulation of the dips. The left (solid) and right (dotted) double-dips correspond to negative and positive Ib respectively. The middle dip (dashed line) is at Ib=0, where two dips overlap.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.7: Preliminary results for overlapping dips.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.1: In quantum mechanics, objects are described by waves. A standing wave in a double well potential can be viewed as a representation of a qubit state. Top figures show classical 0 and 1, where the wave is localized in one of the wells. Bottom figures represent superposition states.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.2: Schematic diagram of four different superconducting qubits. The X signs denote the tunnel junctions (see also Fig. 16.6.3).

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.3: Left: a flux qubit made of an aluminum loop with three tunnel junctions. Right: schematic diagram for the same qubit.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.4: (a) Electron micrograph of one of the samples. The two thin loops in the center are the qubits, see Fig. 16.6.3. (b) Measurement setup. The flux qubits are inductively coupled to an LC circuit. A flux e 0/2 is applied to the qubits via the inductor and the biasing wire Ib.

) |)

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

 Figure 16.6.5: Measured L vs average flux at different temperatures. Temperature decreases from the top to the bottom curve in the dips.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.6: Numerical simulation of the dips. The left (solid) and right (dotted) double-dips correspond to negative and positive Ib respectively. The middle dip (dashed line) is at Ib=0, where two dips overlap.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE

Figure 16.6.7: Preliminary results for overlapping dips.

2004 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference

0-7803-8267-6/04 2004 IEEE