MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390905574 · doi:10.1109/tasc.2024.3354948

Enhancing the Q-Factor of a Practical Qubit Niobium Three-Dimensional λ/4-Resonator Through Surface Treatment

2024· article· en· W4390905574 on OpenAlexaff
Sergey Kutsaev, R. Agustsson, Aurora Cecilia Araujo Martínez, D. M. Broun, Paul Carriere, Ming-Han Chou, Taras Chouinard, A. N. Cleland, P. Frigola, Michael Kelly, Alex Krasnok, Nanda Gopal Matavalam, A. Del Moro, Rhys G. Povey, Thomas Reid, A. Smirnov

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersHigh Energy PhysicsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsQubitQuantum computerResonatorTransmonSuperconductivityNiobiumJosephson effectQ factorComputer scienceEmbeddingQuantumPhysicsElectronic engineeringOptoelectronicsQuantum mechanicsMaterials scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum computing stands as a revolutionary frontier in information technology, with the potential to solve complex problems far beyond the capacity of classical computers. At the heart of this disruptive innovation are qubits, forming the fundamental backbone of quantum computing. A leading-edge solution for constructing robust, enduring qubits involves embedding a Josephson junction within a high Q-factor, superconducting three-dimensional cavity. Our recent innovation lies in developing a uniquely optimized, quarter-wave resonator-based superconducting cavity, functioning at 6 GHz, specifically tailored for quantum computers. In this work, we elucidate our advancement towards elevating the Q-factor tenfold, an achievement made possible through the enhancement of machining precision, the application of rigorous postprocessing techniques—including mechanical, chemical, and surface treatments—as well as the refinement of our testing methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Applied SuperconductivitySame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207