Effect of laser pulse shaping parameters on the fidelity of quantum logic gates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of varying parameters specific to laser pulse shaping instruments on resulting fidelities for the ACNOT(1), NOT(2), and Hadamard(2) quantum logic gates are studied for the diatomic molecule (12)C(16)O. These parameters include varying the frequency resolution, adjusting the number of frequency components and also varying the amplitude and phase at each frequency component. A time domain analytic form of the original discretized frequency domain laser pulse function is derived, providing a useful means to infer the resulting pulse shape through variations to the aforementioned parameters. We show that amplitude variation at each frequency component is a crucial requirement for optimal laser pulse shaping, whereas phase variation provides minimal contribution. We also show that high fidelity laser pulses are dependent upon the frequency resolution and increasing the number of frequency components provides only a small incremental improvement to quantum gate fidelity. Analysis through use of the pulse area theorem confirms the resulting population dynamics for one or two frequency high fidelity laser pulses and implies similar dynamics for more complex laser pulse shapes. The ability to produce high fidelity laser pulses that provide both population control and global phase alignment is attributed greatly to the natural evolution phase alignment of the qubits involved within the quantum logic gate operation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".