Qubit readouts enabled by qubit cloaking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time-dependent drives play a crucial role in quantum computing efforts with circuit quantum electrodynamics. They enable single-qubit control, entangling logical operations, as well as qubit readout. However, their presence can lead to deleterious effects such as large ac-Stark shifts and unwanted qubit transitions ultimately reflected into reduced control or readout fidelities. Qubit cloaking was introduced in Lledó, Dassonneville, et al. [C. Lledó, R. Dassonneville, A. Moulinas et al., Nat. Commun. \textbf{14}, 6313 (2023)] to temporarily decouple the qubit from the coherent photon population of a driven cavity, allowing for the application of arbitrary displacements to the cavity field while avoiding the deleterious effects on the qubit. For qubit readout, cloaking permits to prearm the cavity with an, in principle, arbitrarily large number of photons, in anticipation to the qubit-state-dependent evolution of the cavity field, allowing for improved readout strategies. Here we take a closer look at two of them. First, arm-and-release readout, introduced together with qubit cloaking, where after arming the cavity the cloaking mechanism is released and the cavity field evolves under the application of a constant drive amplitude. Second, an arm-and-longitudinal readout scheme, where the cavity drive amplitude is slowly modulated after the release. We show that the two schemes complement each other, offering an improvement over the standard dispersive readout for any values of the dispersive interaction and cavity decay rate, as well as any target measurement integration time. Our results provide a recommendation for improving qubit readout without changes to the standard circuit QED architecture.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".