Reconfigurable quantum photonic circuits based on quantum dots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantum photonic integrated circuits, composed of linear-optical elements, offer an efficient way for encoding and processing quantum information on-chip. At their core, these circuits rely on reconfigurable phase shifters, typically constructed from classical components such as thermo- or electro-optical materials, while quantum solid-state emitters such as quantum dots are limited to acting as single-photon sources. Here, we demonstrate the potential of quantum dots as reconfigurable phase shifters. We use numerical models based on established literature parameters to show that circuits utilizing these emitters enable high-fidelity operation and are scalable. Despite the inherent imperfections associated with quantum dots, such as imperfect coupling, dephasing, or spectral diffusion, we show that circuits based on these emitters may be optimized such that these do not significantly impact the unitary infidelity. Specifically, they do not increase the infidelity by more than 0.001 in circuits with up to 10 modes, compared to those affected only by standard nanophotonic losses and routing errors. For example, we achieve fidelities of 0.9998 in quantum-dot-based circuits enacting controlled-phase and - not gates without any redundancies. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of quantum emitter-driven quantum information processing and pave the way for cryogenically-compatible, fast, and low-loss reconfigurable quantum photonic circuits.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".