Abstract
The nonadiabatic holonomic quantum computation based on the geometric phase is robust against the built-in noise and decoherence. In this work, we theoretically propose a scheme to realize nonadiabatic holonomic quantum gates in a surface electron system, which is a promising two-dimensional platform for quantum computation. The holonomic gate is realized by a three-level structure that combines the Rydberg states and spin states via an inhomogeneous magnetic field. After a cyclic evolution, the computation bases pick up different geometric phases and thus perform a holonomic gate. Only the electron with spin up experiences the holonomic gate, while the electron with spin down is decoupled from the state-selective driving fields. The arbitrary controlled-U gate encoded on the Rydberg states and spin states can then be realized. The fidelity of the output state exceeds 0.99 with experimentally achievable parameters.
1 Introduction
The quantum geometric phase is a very important resource for quantum computation [1–5]. Quantum gates based on the geometric phase are robust against the disturbance of the dynamic process owing to their global geometric properties [6]. The adiabatic holonomic quantum computation (AHQC) realizes high-fidelity quantum gates via the geometric phase in an adiabatic evolution [7–15]. The AHQC protocol is solely determined by the solid angle of the cyclic evolution in the parameter space, and thus is robust against small perturbations of the evolution path. However, the adiabatic condition [16] of AHQC requires a long evolution time, which accumulates considerable decoherence. Thus, the nonadiabatic holonomic quantum computation (NHQC) was proposed [17–28]. The NHQC preserves the computational universality of the AHQC but does not require the adiabatic condition, and thus has attracted broad interest in recent years [29–45].
On the other hand, the electron on the surface of liquid helium provides a controllable two-dimensional (2D) quantum system, where the surface electron (SE) is attracted by the induced image charge inside the liquid helium and concurrently repulsed by the helium atoms. The confinement perpendicular to the surface leads to a hydrogen-like spectrum which can be used in quantum simulation [46, 47] and quantum information tasks [48, 49]. Meanwhile, the motion parallel to the surface is free of defects and impurities, thus the SE forms a perfect 2D electron system which is widely observed in semiconductor devices [50]. The SE can be manipulated by the circuit QED architecture [51, 52] or the microchannel devices [53–59] with high transport efficiency [60, 61]. With a static magnetic field perpendicular to the surface, the motion parallel to the surface is quantized as orbital states [62], which is similar to the Landau levels. In addition, the spin state of the SE is also an important quantum resource owing to its long relaxation time that exceeds 100 s [63]. Both the Rydberg and orbital states can be coupled to the spin states of electrons [64, 65]. Recent works [66, 67] show a practical method to couple the Rydberg state with the spin state using a local inhomogeneous magnetic field, where the electrons with different expected positions experience different magnetic fields depending on their Rydberg state. The Rydberg states of SE can probably realize large-scale quantum computation owing to the long-range dipole-dipole interaction of adjacent electrons [67], while the spin states may be valuable for quantum memory because of their long lifetime.
In the past, research on the SE has mainly focused on exploring the physical properties, while the efficient quantum gates based on the SE still require further investigation. Therefore, in this work, we propose a scheme to realize the nonadiabatic holonomic gates on both the spin states and Rydberg states of a single SE. We first propose an arbitrary single-qubit holonomic gate on the Rydberg state of the SE, which is realized by a three-level structure driven by time-dependent microwave pulses. During the cyclic evolution, two orthogonal bases pick up different geometric phases. The universal single-qubit holonomic gate is realized by varying the complex ratio between the Rabi frequencies of the two driving fields. Then we introduce an inhomogeneous magnetic field through a magnetized ferromagnetic electrode. The Rydberg states with different expected positions experience different magnetic fields, and thus their Zeeman energy splittings are different. By applying the state-selective pulses, three Rydberg states with spin up are coupled with the driving fields, while the Rydberg states with spin down are decoupled. An arbitrary holonomic single-qubit gate U is applied on the three coupled states, while the three decoupled states remain unchanged. In this way, the holonomic controlled-U gate of the Rydberg and spin states is achieved. Owing to the global geometric properties, the NHQC gates are not sensitive to the fluctuation of the pulse duration. Because the adiabatic condition is not required during the evolution, the fast manipulation makes the scheme robust against dissipation. Our theoretical scheme is based on the experimental configuration, and the parameters are experimentally achievable.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the basic model of the SE in the external magnetic and electric fields and the method to realize holonomic gates. In Section 3, we present the fidelity of the scheme. Finally, we conclude the work and give a prospect in Section 4.
2 Model and methods
2.1 Basic model of the surface electron
Our theoretical proposal is based on the electron above liquid helium. The electron is trapped by the external electric field provided by electrodes [67]. As shown in Figure 1, a pillar electrode with positive voltage and an annular electrode with negative voltage are embedded in the liquid helium. These electrodes apply an electric holding field with the cylindrically symmetric electric potential V(r, z), where z is the vertical coordinate and is the radial coordinate. Meanwhile, the electron is confined by the image potential −Λe2/z introduced by the image charge in the liquid helium, where e is the charge of the electron and Λ = (ϵ − 1)/[4(ϵ + 1)] with the dielectric constant ϵ ≈ 1.057. The vertical motion of the SE is quantized as the Rydberg states. On the other hand, a uniform static magnetic field B0 = B0ez is perpendicularly applied to the surface. Because the total potential −Λe2/z − eV(r, z) is cylindrically symmetric, we introduce the symmetric gauge A = B0 ×r/2. The motion of the electron is determined by the Hamiltonianwhere ωc = eB0/me is the cyclotron frequency, me is the mass of the electron, and Lz is the angular momentum along z-direction, i.e.,where pα and α are the momentum and position of the electron (α = x, y, z), and ϕ is the azimuthal coordinate in the xOy-plane. The vertical and radial motion of the electron is determined bywhere m is an integer. Because of the cylindrical symmetry, the wavefunction can be expressed aswhere is the wavefunction of H0 with the vertical quantum number nz, the radial quantum number nr, and the angular quantum number m. Φ(ϕ) = eimϕ is the azimuthal wavefunction that satisfies LzΦ(ϕ) = mℏΦ(ϕ).
FIGURE 1
The vertical motion of the SE is quantized by the Rydberg state labeled by nz. The expected positions of the lowest three states along the z direction are 7.63 nm, 17.2 nm, and 25.3 nm, which are derived from the numerical solution of the wavefunction, cf. the Supplementary Material. An inhomogeneous magnetic field is induced by the center electrode which is made of ferromagnetic material. The electrons with different nz have different expected positions ⟨z⟩, and thus experience different magnetic fields. The differences of the magnetic field ΔB at the expected positions with nz = 1, 2, 3 are on the order of several mT. The corresponding difference of the Zeeman energy gμBΔB/h is about hundreds of GHz, where g is the Lande g factor and μB = eℏ/(2me) is the Bohr magneton. This energy difference is much larger than the decay rates of the Rydberg states, cf. the Supplementary Material, and plays a significant role in the following controlled-U gate scheme.
2.2 Nonadiabatic holonomic quantum gates based on the Rydberg states and spin states
At first, we will demonstrate the proposal to realize a single-qubit gate in the subspace of a specific spin state, that is, the subspace spanned by {|↑, nz⟩} (nz = 1, 2, 3). As we have mentioned in Section 2.1, the Rydberg states with larger quantum number nz are further away from the liquid surface, and thus experience different magnetic fields. Since the Zeeman energy of the spin state is determined by the inhomogeneous magnetic field, the Zeeman energies of different Rydberg states are different. The magnetic field experienced by state |nz⟩ is . The Zeeman-energy splitting between |↑, nz⟩ and |↓, nz⟩ is , where ↑ and ↓ represent the spin-up and spin-down states, respectively. As shown in Figure 2A, if we label the transition frequency of |↑, nz⟩ ⇔|↑, 3⟩ as (nz = 1, 2), then the transition frequency of |↓, nz⟩ ⇔|↓, 3⟩ is , with . The inhomogeneous magnetic field along the normal direction in the range of 0 ∼ 20 nm is approximately linear, and the gradient is approximately 0.4 mT/nm [67]. The detunings are δ13/2π ≈ 190 MHz and δ23/2π ≈ 90 MHz. Therefore, by applying two state-selective driving fields with frequency , the three Rydberg states with spin up form a Λ-type three-level structure, while the Rydberg states with spin down are decoupled. The driving pulses are controlled by an arbitrary-waveform generator. The Rabi frequencies of |↑, 1⟩ ⇔|↑, 3⟩ and |↑, 2⟩ ⇔|↑, 3⟩ are respectively Ω1(t) and Ω2(t). The ratio between Ω1(t) and Ω2(t) is a constant, i.e., Ω1(t) = Ω(t) sin(θ/2)eiφ and Ω2(t) = −Ω(t) cos(θ/2) with . The interaction Hamiltonian readsHereafter, we assume ℏ = 1 for simplicity. Ω(t) represents the shape of the driving pulse. The duration of the driving pulse can be very short because the adiabatic condition is not required during the evolution. A specific pulse shape is not strictly required for NHQC, but the integral over time needs to be π, i.e., , which will be explained later.
FIGURE 2
The eigenenergies of HI are 0, ± Ω. The corresponding eigenstates areWhere |d⟩ ≡ cos(θ/2)|↑, 1⟩ + sin(θ/2)eiφ|↑, 2⟩ is the dark state, |b⟩ ≡ sin(θ/2)e−iφ|↑, 1⟩ − cos(θ/2)|↑, 2⟩ is the bright state, and |a⟩ = |↑, 3⟩ is the intermediate state. The dark state does not evolve with time because the corresponding eigenenergy is zero. Thus, we definewhereis the evolution operator of HI, and represents the time-ordered integration. We also definewhere . Here we introduce a global phase eiα(t) to ensure a cyclic evolution of |B(t)⟩ when α = π at the final time. The evolutions of |D(t)⟩ and |B(t)⟩ are shown in Figure 2B. The state |D(t)⟩ is unchanged, while the state |B(t)⟩ evolves along the longitude line of the Bloch sphere with bases {|b⟩, |a⟩} and induces a geometric phase. To make use of the geometric phase, we introduce the following instantaneous orthogonal bases,By choosing α(τ) = π at the final time τ, |ξ1(τ)⟩ = |ξ1(0)⟩ = |↑, 1⟩ and |ξ2(τ)⟩ = |ξ2(0)⟩ = |↑, 2⟩, i.e., |ξ1(t)⟩ and |ξ2(t)⟩ coincide with the computation bases |↑, 1⟩ and |↑, 2⟩ both at the beginning and end of time. It can be easily verified that the parallel transport condition ⟨ξ1(t)|HI(t)|ξ2(t)⟩ = 0 is satisfied during the whole evolution t ∈ [0, τ]. Thus, the dynamic phases vanish and the evolution operator U(τ) in the subspace spanned by |↑, 1⟩ and |↑, 2⟩ is [19, 29]where n = (sin θ cos φ, sin θ sin φ, cos θ), σ = (σx, σy, σz) are the Pauli operators, and the connection matrix iswhose matrix elements are determined byTherefore, a single-qubit holonomic gate on the coupled Rydberg states is realized by adjusting the complex ratio tan(θ/2)eiφ between the Rabi frequencies of the two driving fields. For example, a Hadamard gate H is realized by (θ, φ) = (π/4, 0), and a NOT gate X is realized by (θ, φ) = (π/2, 0). In addition, two sequential holonomic gates lead towhich forms an arbitrary SU(2) transformation that rotates the state around the axis n ×m by the angle 2 arccos(n ⋅m) [19, 68]. For instance, the π/8 phase gate [68] is realized by two sequential gates with (θ, φ) = (π/2, 0) and (θ, φ) = (π/2, π/8).
Next, we will demonstrate the two-qubit gate proposal by taking two spin states into account. As shown in Figure 2A, the Rydberg states with spin down are off-resonant with the driving fields. Thus, the subspace spanned by {|↓, nz⟩} (nz = 1, 2, 3) is decoupled with the driving fields. The total evolution operator in the subspace spanned by {|↓, 1⟩, |↓, 2⟩, |↑, 1⟩, |↑, 2⟩} iswhere U is the single-qubit gate on the Rydberg states according to Eq. 14. In this way, the holonomic controlled-U gate with the spin state being the control qubit is realized. In addition, according to Eq. 17, by applying two controlled gate sequentially, we can realize an arbitrary controlled-U gate. For example, by choosing (θ, φ) = (π/2, 0), U = X and a CNOT gate is realized aswhere I and X are the identity operator and qubit-flip operator in the subspace spanned by {|nz = 1⟩, |nz = 2⟩}, respectively. The Rydberg states flip only if the spin state is |↑⟩. Similarly, by choosing (θ, φ) = (0, 0), U = Z and a controlled phase (CZ) gate is achieved.
In the presence of dissipation, the evolution of the system can be described by the quantum master equation [69]where the Lindblad operator iswhere {A, B} = AB+ BA is the anti-commutator, Cmn = |m⟩⟨n| is the collapse operator with the corresponding decay rate κmn. It is noteworthy that κmn increases with the electric holding field E⊥ induced by the electrodes, cf. the Supplementary Material. For typical experimental configuration, E⊥ is on the order of 100 ∼ 1000 V/cm [70]. Hereafter the evolution with dissipation is solved by QuTiP [71, 72].
3 Results
The state fidelity F between the final state ρ(t) and the ideal target state ρi is defined as [68]
In Table 1, we present the fidelity of the CNOT gate with typical initial states under the influence of dissipation. While in Table 2, we present the fidelity of the controlled-phase (CZ) gate. The decay rates are calculated under a typical electric holding field E⊥ = 100 V/cm [73]. Because the adiabatic condition is not required during the evolution, the evolving time can be very short. For the typical microwave driving with Rabi frequency ΩR/2π = 40 MHz [50, 73], we use the Gaussian driving pulse with the duration T = 2π/ΩR = 25 ns and the standard deviation σ = T/8. The full width at half maxima (FWHM) is .
TABLE 1
| Input state | Ideal output state | Fidelity |
|---|---|---|
| |↓, 1⟩ | |↓, 1⟩ | 1 |
| |↓, 2⟩ | |↓, 2⟩ | 0.9957 |
| |↑, 1⟩ | |↑, 2⟩ | 0.9977 |
| |↑, 2⟩ | |↑, 1⟩ | 0.9977 |
| 0.9988 |
The output-state fidelity of the CNOT gate under typical input states. The decay rates are calculated under a typical electric holding field E⊥ = 100 V/cm, which are κ21 = 1.95 MHz, κ32 = 0.22 MHz, and κ31 = 1.69 MHz.
TABLE 2
| Input state | Ideal output state | Fidelity |
|---|---|---|
| 0.9988 | ||
| 0.9988 | ||
| 0.9989 | ||
| 0.9989 |
The output-state fidelity of the CZ gate under typical input states. The decay rates are the same as Table 1.
It is noteworthy that the CNOT gate can generate an entangled state from a product state. Thus, we present the time evolution of the initial product state in Figure 3 and the density matrix of the final state in Figure 4. The result shows that the initial state evolves to the maximal-entangled state with high fidelity. Figure 3 also indicates that the fidelity F > 0.99 as long as t > 0.67 T. Even if the pulse duration is a little bit longer or shorter than T, the fidelity of the final state is still very high. Thus, the NHQC method is not sensitive to the fluctuation of the pulse duration, which might be commonly observed in experiments.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
Generally the electric holding field E⊥ is applied to the experimental system in order to confine the motion of electrons and tune the energy spacing between the Rydberg states. E⊥ is on the order of 100 ∼ 1000 V/cm for typical experimental configuration [70]. Because κmn increases with E⊥, we investigate the fidelity with initial state under different electric fields, as shown in Figure 5. The fidelity F is higher than 0.99 for E⊥ < 400 V/cm, and higher than 0.96 for E⊥ < 1000 V/cm. Therefore, our scheme is robust against dissipation in experiments.
FIGURE 5
As for the single-qubit gate, we can apply four resonant drivings with frequencies being respectively ω13, ω23, ω13 + δ13, and ω23 + δ23, and simultaneously perform two NHQC gates in the spin up and spin down subspace, as shown in Figure 6. In this way, a single-qubit gate on the Rydberg state is performed, i.e.,where U is the single-qubit operation in Eq. 14 and I is the identity operator. This proposal still works when the driving pulses ω13, ω23 and ω13 + δ13, ω23 + δ23 are not applied simultaneously. In Table 3 we present the average output-state fidelity of the single-qubit NOT gate and Hadamard gate. The “non-simultaneous case” implies that the driving pulses with frequencies ω13 + δ13 and ω23 + δ23 are applied T/4 later than the driving pulses with frequencies ω13 and ω23. The state fidelity is obtained by the following procedures. We begin with the initial state , which is the product state of the spin state and the Rydberg state, i.e., . Then we derive the final state from the evolution determined by the master Eq. 21. Next, we obtain the reduced density matrix of the Rydberg state by taking partial trace on , i.e., . Finally, we acquire the state fidelity between and the ideal final state. The average fidelity in Table 3 is derived by averaging the results of six input states, with the initial spin state being and the initial Rydberg states being |1⟩, |2⟩, , , , and , respectively. The results indicate that for both the NOT gate and Hadamard gate we can achieve near-unity fidelity.
FIGURE 6
TABLE 3
| Single-qubit gate | Simultaneously | Non-simultaneously |
|---|---|---|
| NOT gate | 0.9984 | 0.9980 |
| Hadamard gate | 0.9985 | 0.9981 |
Average output-state fidelity of the single-qubit gates in the simultaneous case and non-simultaneous case. The decay rates are the same as Table 1.
4 Conclusion and remarks
In this work, we present a scheme to realize nonadiabatic holonomic gates in an SE system based on the experimental configuration [67]. By applying the state-selective pulses, three Rydberg states with spin up are coupled with driving fields. During the evolution, two orthogonal bases acquire different geometric phases and thus perform a geometric gate. By varying the complex ratio between the Rabi frequencies of the two driving fields, the universal single-qubit nonadiabatic holonomic quantum gate is realized. The controlled-U gate on the Rydberg and spin states is based on the different Zeeman energy splittings in the inhomogeneous magnetic field. With the state-selective driving pulses we perform an arbitrary single-qubit gate U on the Rydberg states with spin up while the Rydberg states with spin down remain unchanged.
It is noteworthy that we can also realize controlled-U gates considering the Rydberg states as the control qubit. As shown in Figure 6, the electron-spin-resonance frequencies of |nz = 1⟩ and |nz = 2⟩ are ωZ1 and ωZ2, respectively. Because the magnetic field at the expected positions of |nz = 1⟩ and |nz = 2⟩ are different, the difference between ωZ1 and ωZ2 is δ12 = ωZ1 − ωZ2 = gμB(B(1) − B(2)). δ12 is on the order of several hundreds MHz, which is much larger than the decay rate MHz. Thus, we can resonantly drive the transition between the two spin states and perform a quantum gate through the Rabi oscillation when the Rydberg state is |nz = 2⟩, while keep the spin states unchanged when the Rydberg state is |nz = 1⟩.
Because of the fast nonadiabatic evolution, the NHQC proposal is robust against dissipation. Our theoretical scheme is based on the experimental configuration, and the parameters are experimentally achievable. Therefore, this work will supply heuristic insight for fast-manipulation tasks of holonomic quantum computation that involve both the Rydberg and spin states of the SE.
Statements
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusion of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Author contributions
JW: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing, Visualization. W-TH: Methodology, Writing–original draft. H-BW: Funding acquisition, Investigation, Supervision, Writing–review and editing, Validation. QA: Funding acquisition, Investigation, Supervision, Writing–review and editing, Validation.
Funding
The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. H-BW is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 61675028 and the Interdiscipline Research Funds of Beijing Normal University. QA is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality under Grant No. 1202017 and the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos 11674033, 11505007, and Beijing Normal University under Grant No. 2022129.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2024.1348804/full#supplementary-material
References
1.
SimonB. Holonomy, the quantum adiabatic theorem, and Berry’s phase. Phys Rev Lett (1983) 51:2167–70. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.51.2167
2.
BerryMV. Quantal phase factors accompanying adiabatic changes. Proc R Soc Lond (1984) 392:45. 10.1098/rspa.1984.0023
3.
LeekPJFinkJMBlaisABianchettiRGöpplMGambettaJMet alObservation of Berry’s phase in a solid-state qubit. Science (2007) 318:1889–92. 10.1126/science.1149858
4.
AiQHuoWYLongGLSunCP. Nonadiabatic fluctuation in the measured geometric phase. Phys Rev A (2009) 80:024101. 10.1103/PhysRevA.80.024101
5.
ChitambarEGourG. Quantum resource theories. Rev Mod Phys (2019) 91:025001. 10.1103/RevModPhys.91.025001
6.
ZhangJKyawTHFilippSKwekLCSjöqvistDTongDM. Geometric and holonomic quantum computation. Phys Rep (2023) 1027:1–53. 10.1016/j.physrep.2023.07.004
7.
ZanardiPRasettiM. Holonomic quantum computation. Phys Lett A (1999) 264:94–9. 10.1016/S0375-9601(99)00803-8
8.
OsterlohAAmicoLFalciGFazioR. Scaling of entanglement close to a quantum phase transition. Nature (2002) 416:608–10. 10.1038/416608a
9.
FaoroLSiewertJFazioR. Non-Abelian holonomies, charge pumping, and quantum computation with josephson junctions. Phys Rev Lett (2003) 90:028301. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.028301
10.
DuanLMCiracJIZollerP. Geometric manipulation of trapped ions for quantum computation. Science (2001) 292:1695–7. 10.1126/science.1058835
11.
SolinasPZanardiPZanghìNRossiF. Semiconductor-based geometrical quantum gates. Phys Rev B (2003) 67:121307(R). 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.121307
12.
TongDMSjöqvistEKwekLCOhCH. Kinematic approach to the mixed state geometric phase in nonunitary evolution. Phys Rev Lett (2004) 93:080405. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.080405
13.
YiXXWangLCZhengTY. Berry phase in a composite system. Phys Rev Lett (2004) 92:150406. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.150406
14.
SongXKZhangHAiQQiuJDengFG. Shortcuts to adiabatic holonomic quantum computation in decoherence-free subspace with transitionless quantum driving algorithm. New J Phys (2016) 416:023001. 10.1088/1367-2630/18/2/023001
15.
SongXKAiQQiuJDengFG. Physically feasible three-level transitionless quantum driving with multiple Schrödinger dynamics. Phys Rev A (2016) 93:052324. 10.1103/PhysRevA.93.052324
16.
IvakhnenkoOVShevchenkoSNNoriF. Nonadiabatic landau–zener–stückelberg–majorana transitions, dynamics, and interference. Phys Rep (2023) 995:1–89. 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.10.002
17.
WangXBMatsumotoK. Nonadiabatic conditional geometric phase shift with NMR. Phys Rev Lett (2001) 87:097901. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.097901
18.
ZhuSLWangZD. Implementation of universal quantum gates based on nonadiabatic geometric phases. Phys Rev Lett (2002) 89:097902. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.097902
19.
SjöqvistETongDMAnderssonLMHessmoBJohanssonMSinghK. Non-adiabatic holonomic quantum computation. New J Phys (2012) 14:103035. 10.1088/1367-2630/14/10/103035
20.
XuGFZhangJTongDMSjöqvistEKwekLC. Nonadiabatic holonomic quantum computation in decoherence-free subspaces. Phys Rev Lett (2012) 109:170501. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.170501
21.
XuGFLongGL. Protecting geometric gates by dynamical decoupling. Phys Rev A (2014) 90:022323. 10.1103/PhysRevA.90.022323
22.
XueZYZhouJWangZD. Universal holonomic quantum gates in decoherence-free subspace on superconducting circuits. Phys Rev A (2015) 92:022320. 10.1103/PhysRevA.92.022320
23.
XuGFLiuCLZhaoPZTongDM. Nonadiabatic holonomic gates realized by a single-shot implementation. Phys Rev A (2015) 92:052302. 10.1103/PhysRevA.92.052302
24.
ZhengSBYangCPNoriF. Comparison of the sensitivity to systematic errors between nonadiabatic non-Abelian geometric gates and their dynamical counterparts. Phys Rev A (2016) 93:032313. 10.1103/PhysRevA.93.032313
25.
XuGFZhaoPZTongDMSjöqvistE. Robust paths to realize nonadiabatic holonomic gates. Phys Rev A (2017) 95:052349. 10.1103/PhysRevA.95.052349
26.
XueZYGuFLHongZPYangZHZhangDWHuYet alNonadiabatic holonomic quantum computation with dressed-state qubits. Phys Rev Appl (2017) 7:054022. 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.7.054022
27.
ChenSSZhangHSongXKDengFGWangHBYangGJ. Universal single-qubit nonadiabatic holonomic quantum gates on an optomechanical system. Ann Phys (Berlin) (2018) 530:1800239. 10.1002/andp.201800239
28.
JinZYJingJ. Geometric quantum gates via dark paths in Rydberg atoms. arXiv: 2307.07148 (2023).
29.
ZuCWangWBHeLZhangWGDaiCYWangFet alExperimental realization of universal geometric quantum gates with solid-state spins. Nature (2014) 514:72–5. 10.1038/nature13729
30.
Arroyo-CamejoSLazarievLHellSWBalasubramanianG. Room temperature high-fidelity holonomic single-qubit gate on a solid-state spin. Nat Commun (2014) 5:4870. 10.1038/ncomms5870
31.
YaleCGHeremansFJZhouBBAuerABurkardGAwschalomDD. Optical manipulation of the Berry phase in a solid-state spin qubit. Nat Photon (2016) 10:184–9. 10.1038/nphoton.2015.278
32.
SekiguchiYNiikuraNKuroiwaRKanoHKosakaH. Optical holonomic single quantum gates with a geometric spin under a zero field. Nat Photon (2017) 11:309–14. 10.1038/nphoton.2017.40
33.
AbdumalikovAAJrFinkJMJuliussonKPechalMBergerSWallraffAet alExperimental realization of non-Abelian non-adiabatic geometric gates. Nature (2013) 496:482–5. 10.1038/nature12010
34.
FengGRXuGFLongGL. Experimental realization of nonadiabatic holonomic quantum computation. Phys Rev Lett (2013) 110:190501. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.190501
35.
ZhouBBJergerPCShkolnikovVOHeremansFJBurkardGAwschalomDD. Holonomic quantum control by coherent optical excitation in diamond. Phys Rev Lett (2017) 119:140503. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.140503
36.
ZhangJDevittSJYouJQNoriF. Holonomic surface codes for fault-tolerant quantum computation. Phys Rev A (2018) 97:022335. 10.1103/PhysRevA.97.022335
37.
LerouxFPandeyKRehbiRChevyFMiniaturaCGrémaudBet alNon-Abelian adiabatic geometric transformations in a cold strontium gas. Nat Commun (2018) 9:3580. 10.1038/s41467-018-05865-3
38.
NagataKKuramitaniKSekiguchiYKosakaH. Universal holonomic quantum gates over geometric spin qubits with polarised microwaves. Nat Commun (2018) 9:3227. 10.1038/s41467-018-05664-w
39.
XuYCaiWMaYMuXHuLChenTet alSingle-loop realization of arbitrary nonadiabatic holonomic single-qubit quantum gates in a superconducting circuit. Phys Rev Lett (2018) 121:110501. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.110501
40.
HuangYYWuYKWangFHouPYWangWBZhangWGet alExperimental realization of robust geometric quantum gates with solid-state spins. Phys Rev Lett (2019) 122:010503. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.010503
41.
YanTXLiuBJXuKSongCLiuSZhangZSet alExperimental realization of nonadiabatic shortcut to non-Abelian geometric gates. Phys Rev Lett (2019) 122:080501. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.080501
42.
LiuBJSongXKXueZYWangXYungMH. Plug-and-play approach to nonadiabatic geometric quantum gates. Phys Rev Lett (2019) 123:100501. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.100501
43.
RambergNSjöqvistE. Environment-assisted holonomic quantum maps. Phys Rev Lett (2019) 122:140501. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.140501
44.
XuYHuaZChenTPanXLiXHanJet alExperimental implementation of universal nonadiabatic geometric quantum gates in a superconducting circuit. Phys Rev Lett (2020) 124:230503. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.230503
45.
ChenYHQinWStassiRWangXNoriF. Fast binomial-code holonomic quantum computation with ultrastrong light-matter coupling. Phys Rev Res (2021) 3:033275. 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.033275
46.
BulutaINoriF. Quantum simulators. Science (2009) 326:108–11. 10.1126/science.1177838
47.
GeorgescuIMAshhabSNoriF. Quantum simulation. Rev Mod Phys (2014) 86:153–85. 10.1103/RevModPhys.86.153
48.
PlatzmanPMDykmanMI. Quantum computing with electrons floating on liquid helium. Science (1999) 284:1967–9. 10.1126/science.284.5422.1967
49.
WangJHeWTLuCWWyYAiQWhB. Controlled-not gate based on the rydberg states of surface electrons. Ann Phys (Berlin) (2023) 535:2300138. 10.1002/andp.202300138
50.
KawakamiEElarabiAKonstantinovD. Relaxation of the excited Rydberg states of surface electrons on liquid helium. Phys Rev Lett (2021) 126:106802. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.106802
51.
KoolstraGYangGSchusterDI. Coupling a single electron on superfluid helium to a superconducting resonator. Nat Commun (2019) 10:5323. 10.1038/s41467-019-13335-7
52.
ZhouXJKoolstraGZhangXFYangGHanXDizdarBet alSingle electrons on solid neon as a solid-state qubit platform. Nature (2022) 605:46–50. 10.1038/s41586-022-04539-x
53.
GlassonPDotsenkoVFozooniPLeaMJBaileyWPapageorgiouGet alObservation of dynamical ordering in a confined Wigner crystal. Phys Rev Lett (2001) 87:176802. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.176802
54.
IkegamiHAkimotoHKonoK. Nonlinear transport of the Wigner solid on superfluid 4He in a channel geometry. Phys Rev Lett (2009) 102:046807. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.046807
55.
ReesDGKurodaIMarrache-KikuchiCAHöferMLeidererPKonoK. Point-contact transport properties of strongly correlated electrons on liquid helium. Phys Rev Lett (2011) 106:026803. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.026803
56.
IkegamiHAkimotoHReesDGKonoK. Evidence for reentrant melting in a quasi-one-dimensional Wigner crystal. Phys Rev Lett (2012) 109:236802. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.236802
57.
ReesDGBeysengulovNRLinJJKonoK. Stick-slip motion of the Wigner solid on liquid helium. Phys Rev Lett (2016) 116:206801. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.206801
58.
ReesDGBeysengulovNRTeranishiYTsaoCSYehSSChiuSPet alStructural order and melting of a quasi-one-dimensional electron system. Phys Rev B (2016) 94:045139. 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.045139
59.
BadrutdinovAOReesDGLinJYSmorodinAVKonstantinovD. Unidirectional charge transport via ripplonic polarons in a three-terminal microchannel device. Phys Rev Lett (2020) 124:126803. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.126803
60.
BradburyFRTakitaMGurrieriTMWilkelKJEngKCarrollMSet alEfficient clocked electron transfer on superfluid helium. Phys Rev Lett (2011) 107:266803. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.266803
61.
KielpinskiDMonroeCWinelandDJ. Architecture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer. Nature (2002) 417:709–11. 10.1038/nature00784
62.
ChenJBZadorozhkoAAKonstantinovD. Strong coupling of a two-dimensional electron ensemble to a single-mode cavity resonator. Phys Rev B (2018) 98:235418. 10.1103/PhysRevB.98.235418
63.
LyonSA. Spin-based quantum computing using electrons on liquid helium. Phys Rev A (2006) 74:052338. 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.052338
64.
SchusterDIFragnerADykmanMILyonSASchoelkopfRJ. Proposal for manipulating and detecting spin and orbital states of trapped electrons on helium using cavity quantum electrodynamics. Phys Rev Lett (2010) 105:040503. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.040503
65.
KawakamiEElarabiAKonstantinovD. Image-charge detection of the Rydberg states of surface electrons on liquid helium. Phys Rev Lett (2019) 123:086801. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.086801
66.
TokuraYvan der WielWGObataTTaruchaS. Coherent single electron spin control in a slanting Zeeman field. Phys Rev Lett (2006) 96:047202. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.047202
67.
KawakamiEChenJBenitoMKonstantinovD. Blueprint for quantum computing using electrons on helium. Phys Rev Appl (2023) 20:054022. 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.20.054022
68.
NielsenMAChuangIL. Quantum computation and quantum information. Cambridge University Press (2010).
69.
BreuerHPPetruccioneF. The theory of open quantum systems. Oxford University Press (2002).
70.
ZouSKonstantinovD. Image-charge detection of the rydberg transition of electrons on superfluid helium confined in a microchannel structure. New J Phys (2022) 24:103026. 10.1088/1367-2630/ac9696
71.
JohanssonJRNationPDNoriF. QuTiP: an open-source python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems. Comput Phys Commun (2012) 183:1760–72. 10.1016/j.cpc.2012.02.021
72.
JohanssonJRNationPDNoriF. QuTiP 2: a python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems. Comput Phys Commun (2013) 184:1234–40. 10.1016/j.cpc.2012.11.019
73.
KonstantinovDKonoKMonarkhaYP. Photoresonance and conductivity of surface electrons on liquid 3He. Low Temp Phys (2008) 34:377–84. 10.1063/1.2911657
Summary
Keywords
holonomic quantum computation, geometric phase, surface electron, quantum computation, quantum information
Citation
Wang J, He W-T, Wang H-B and Ai Q (2024) Universal quantum gates by nonadiabatic holonomic evolution for the surface electron. Front. Phys. 12:1348804. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2024.1348804
Received
03 December 2023
Accepted
08 January 2024
Published
31 January 2024
Volume
12 - 2024
Edited by
Tao Li, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, China
Reviewed by
Xue-Ke Song, Anhui University, China
Guanyu Wang, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, China
Hai-Rui Wei, University of Science and Technology Beijing, China
Updates
Copyright
© 2024 Wang, He, Wang and Ai.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Hai-Bo Wang, hbwang@bnu.edu.cn; Qing Ai, aiqing@bnu.edu.cn
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.