Quantum information in the real world: Diagnosing and correcting errors in practical quantum devices

Quantum computers promise to be a revolutionary new technology. However, in order to realise this promise many hurdles must first be overcome. In this thesis we investigate two such hurdles: the presence of noise in quantum computers and limitations on the connectivity and control in large scale quantum computing architectures.In order to combat noise in quantum devices we must first characterize this noise. To do this several diagnostic tools have been developed over the last two decades. The current industry standard for such a diagnostic tool is called randomized benchmarking. Randomized benchmarking doesn't give a full characterization of the noise afflicting the quantum device but rather attempts to give some indication of of the device's average behavior, captured in a quantity called the average fidelity. Because it does not endeavor to characterize every small detail of the noise it can be efficiently applied even to very large quantum devices. However, with this power also comes increased complexity. Randomized benchmarking has a lot of moving parts, and some fairly strong assumptions must be made in order to guarantee its correctness. In this thesis we attempt to justify these assumptions and if possible remove or weaken them, making randomized benchmarking a more robust and general tool. In chapter 6 of this thesis we investigate the finite statistics of randomized benchmarking. We prove strong bounds on the number of samples needed to perform rigorous randomized benchmarking. To do this we make use tools from representation theory. In particular we use a characterization of certain representations of the Clifford group, which we develop in chapter 5. In chapter 7 we re-use these tools to also bound the number of samples needed to perform rigorous unitarity randomized benchmarking, a newer variant of randomized benchmarking quickly gaining in popularity. These results retroactively justify the use of randomized benchmarking in an experimental setting and also provide guidance on optimal statistical practices in the context of randomized benchmarking. In chapter 8 we expand upon the standard randomized benchmarking protocol and formulate a new class of protocols which we call character randomized benchmarking. This new class of protocols removes a critical assumption made in standard randomized benchmarking, making character randomized benchmarking vastly more generally applicable. To show the advantages of character randomized benchmarking we implement it in an experiment characterizing the noise in a Si/SiGe quantum dot device. This experiment is detailed in chapter 9. Finally we deal with the second main topic of this thesis in chapter 10. Large scale quantum computer will, like classical computers, face limitations in the connectivity between different parts of the computer. This is due to a fundamental law in computer design called Rent's rule, which states that the number of wires connecting a (quantum) computer chip to the outside world is much smaller than the number of components in that chip. This means the individual components of the chip can not be controlled individually in parallel. Given that parallelism is absolutely critical for the functioning of quantum computers this is a serious problem for the development of large scale quantum computers. Luckily it is possible to organize quantum computing devices in such a way that they can be controlled using a relatively small amount of input wires. One example of such an organization is called a crossbar architecture. Recently a proposal was made for a crossbar architecture quantum computer in quantum dots, and in chapter 10 of this thesis we investigate in detail the advantages and disadvantages of such an architecture. We focus in particular on its effect on standard quantum error correction procedures, a key part of a functioning quantum computer, and one where parallel control of all parts of the quantum device is essential.

[1]  Isaac L. Chuang,et al.  Prescription for experimental determination of the dynamics of a quantum black box , 1997 .

[2]  R Hanson,et al.  Universal control and error correction in multi-qubit spin registers in diamond. , 2013, Nature nanotechnology.

[3]  D. Gottesman Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation , 1997, quant-ph/9702029.

[4]  S T Merkel,et al.  Supplemental Materials : Reduced sensitivity to charge noise in semiconductor spin qubits via symmetric operation , 2016 .

[5]  J. Siewert,et al.  Natural two-qubit gate for quantum computation using the XY interaction , 2002, quant-ph/0209035.

[6]  Bryan Eastin,et al.  Randomized benchmarking with restricted gate sets , 2018, Physical Review A.

[7]  Tino Heijmen Soft Errors from Space to Ground: Historical Overview, Empirical Evidence, and Future Trends , 2011 .

[8]  Jeroen van de Graaf,et al.  Cryptographic Distinguishability Measures for Quantum-Mechanical States , 1997, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[9]  Michael R. Fellows,et al.  Fixed-Parameter Tractability and Completeness II: On Completeness for W[1] , 1995, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Stephen Becker,et al.  Quantum state tomography via compressed sensing. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[11]  T. Ralph,et al.  Quantum process tomography of a controlled-NOT gate. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[12]  J. M. Farinholt,et al.  An ideal characterization of the Clifford operators , 2013, 1307.5087.

[13]  Jonas Helsen,et al.  Multiqubit randomized benchmarking using few samples , 2017, Physical Review A.

[14]  Christoph Dankert,et al.  Exact and Approximate Unitary 2-Designs: Constructions and Applications , 2006, quant-ph/0606161.

[15]  Jay M. Gambetta,et al.  Self-Consistent Quantum Process Tomography , 2012, 1211.0322.

[16]  Arnaud Carignan-Dugas,et al.  From randomized benchmarking experiments to gate-set circuit fidelity: how to interpret randomized benchmarking decay parameters , 2018, New Journal of Physics.

[17]  Steven T. Flammia,et al.  Estimating the coherence of noise , 2015, 1503.07865.

[18]  E. Knill,et al.  Randomized Benchmarking of Quantum Gates , 2007, 0707.0963.

[19]  D. E. Savage,et al.  A programmable two-qubit quantum processor in silicon , 2017, Nature.

[20]  Mark A. Eriksson,et al.  Gate fidelity and coherence of an electron spin in an Si/SiGe quantum dot with micromagnet , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  R. Kueng,et al.  Distinguishing quantum states using Clifford orbits , 2016, 1609.08595.

[22]  Jonas Helsen,et al.  A crossbar network for silicon quantum dot qubits , 2017, Science Advances.

[23]  Jay M. Gambetta,et al.  Process verification of two-qubit quantum gates by randomized benchmarking , 2012, 1210.7011.

[24]  Jonas Helsen,et al.  Efficient unitarity randomized benchmarking of few-qubit Clifford gates , 2018, Physical Review A.

[25]  Seth Lloyd,et al.  Convergence conditions for random quantum circuits , 2005, quant-ph/0503210.

[26]  D. Gottesman An Introduction to Quantum Error Correction and Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation , 2009, 0904.2557.

[27]  John J. Cannon,et al.  The Magma Algebra System I: The User Language , 1997, J. Symb. Comput..

[28]  John A. Smolin,et al.  How to efficiently select an arbitrary Clifford group element , 2014, 1406.2170.

[29]  Stephen D Bartlett,et al.  Ultrahigh Error Threshold for Surface Codes with Biased Noise. , 2017, Physical review letters.

[30]  Richard Kueng,et al.  Low rank matrix recovery from Clifford orbits , 2016, ArXiv.

[31]  K. Brown,et al.  Graduate Texts in Mathematics , 1982 .

[32]  F. K. Wilhelm,et al.  Complete randomized benchmarking protocol accounting for leakage errors , 2015, 1505.00580.

[33]  D. West Introduction to Graph Theory , 1995 .

[34]  Alexander Semenovich Holevo,et al.  ADDITIVITY CONJECTURE AND COVARIANT CHANNELS , 2005 .

[35]  Joel J. Wallman Bounding experimental quantum error rates relative to fault-tolerant thresholds , 2015 .

[36]  Michelle Y. Simmons,et al.  A surface code quantum computer in silicon , 2015, Science Advances.

[37]  Scott Aaronson,et al.  Improved Simulation of Stabilizer Circuits , 2004, ArXiv.

[38]  Joel J. Wallman,et al.  Randomized benchmarking with gate-dependent noise , 2017, 1703.09835.

[39]  Ion Nechita,et al.  A universal set of qubit quantum channels , 2013, 1306.0495.

[40]  A. Fowler,et al.  High-threshold universal quantum computation on the surface code , 2008, 0803.0272.

[41]  Joseph Emerson,et al.  Robust characterization of leakage errors , 2016 .

[42]  D. Gross,et al.  Evenly distributed unitaries: On the structure of unitary designs , 2006, quant-ph/0611002.

[43]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Convex Optimization , 2004, Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook.

[44]  Bryan H. Fong,et al.  Randomized Benchmarking as Convolution: Fourier Analysis of Gate Dependent Errors , 2018, Quantum.

[45]  M Steffen,et al.  Characterization of addressability by simultaneous randomized benchmarking. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[46]  Timothy Proctor,et al.  Probing Context-Dependent Errors in Quantum Processors , 2018, Physical Review X.

[47]  Saeed Fallahi,et al.  Noise Suppression Using Symmetric Exchange Gates in Spin Qubits. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[48]  Austin G. Fowler,et al.  Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery , 2011, 1111.4022.

[49]  Charles R. Johnson,et al.  Matrix Analysis, 2nd Ed , 2012 .

[50]  B. Terhal Quantum error correction for quantum memories , 2013, 1302.3428.

[51]  Joe Harris,et al.  Representation Theory: A First Course , 1991 .

[52]  Jens Koch,et al.  Randomized benchmarking and process tomography for gate errors in a solid-state qubit. , 2008, Physical review letters.

[53]  Yi-Kai Liu,et al.  Direct fidelity estimation from few Pauli measurements. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[54]  Krysta Marie Svore,et al.  Low-distance Surface Codes under Realistic Quantum Noise , 2014, ArXiv.

[55]  Andrew W. Cross,et al.  Scalable randomised benchmarking of non-Clifford gates , 2015, npj Quantum Information.

[56]  Debbie W. Leung,et al.  Quantum data hiding , 2002, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[57]  Andrew W. Cross,et al.  Investigating the limits of randomized benchmarking protocols , 2013, 1308.2928.

[58]  Markus Grassl,et al.  The Clifford group fails gracefully to be a unitary 4-design , 2016, 1609.08172.

[59]  L. DiCarlo,et al.  Initialization by measurement of a superconducting quantum bit circuit. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[60]  Huangjun Zhu Multiqubit Clifford groups are unitary 3-designs , 2015, 1510.02619.

[61]  Jay M. Gambetta,et al.  Quantification and characterization of leakage errors , 2017, 1704.03081.

[62]  Jonas Helsen,et al.  Representations of the multi-qubit Clifford group , 2016, Journal of Mathematical Physics.

[63]  Zak Webb,et al.  The Clifford group forms a unitary 3-design , 2015, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[64]  R. Goodman,et al.  Symmetry, Representations, and Invariants , 2009 .

[65]  Jacob M. Taylor,et al.  Coherent Manipulation of Coupled Electron Spins in Semiconductor Quantum Dots , 2005, Science.

[66]  John Watrous,et al.  The Theory of Quantum Information , 2018 .

[67]  Andrew J. Landahl,et al.  Fault-tolerant quantum computing with color codes , 2011, 1108.5738.

[68]  Damian Markham,et al.  Derandomizing Quantum Circuits with Measurement-Based Unitary Designs. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[69]  Christopher Ferrie,et al.  Accelerated randomized benchmarking , 2014, 1404.5275.

[70]  M. Mariantoni,et al.  Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation , 2012, 1208.0928.

[71]  Shinichi Tojo,et al.  Electron spin coherence exceeding seconds in high-purity silicon. , 2011, Nature materials.

[72]  Arnaud Carignan-Dugas,et al.  Characterizing universal gate sets via dihedral benchmarking , 2015, 1508.06312.

[73]  B. David Saunders,et al.  Fast computation of Smith forms of sparse matrices over local rings , 2012, ISSAC.

[74]  Jonas Helsen,et al.  A new class of efficient randomized benchmarking protocols , 2018, npj Quantum Information.

[75]  James V. Beck,et al.  Parameter Estimation in Engineering and Science , 1977 .

[76]  W. Hoeffding Probability Inequalities for sums of Bounded Random Variables , 1963 .

[77]  R. A. Low Large deviation bounds for k-designs , 2009, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[78]  Charles R. MacCluer,et al.  The Many Proofs and Applications of Perron's Theorem , 2000, SIAM Rev..

[79]  L. Vandersypen,et al.  NMR techniques for quantum control and computation , 2004, quant-ph/0404064.

[80]  Zijun Chen,et al.  Measuring and Suppressing Quantum State Leakage in a Superconducting Qubit. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[81]  Joseph Emerson,et al.  Scalable and robust randomized benchmarking of quantum processes. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[82]  David G. Cory,et al.  Bayesian Inference for Randomized Benchmarking Protocols , 2018, 1802.00401.

[83]  K. Itoh,et al.  Optimized electrical control of a Si/SiGe spin qubit in the presence of an induced frequency shift , 2018, npj Quantum Information.

[84]  Jay M. Gambetta,et al.  Characterizing Quantum Gates via Randomized Benchmarking , 2011, 1109.6887.