pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.26528 · v2 · pith:D4YTWCLNnew · submitted 2026-05-26 · 🪐 quant-ph

Crosstalk In Contemporary Quantum Devices

Spiro Gicev , Ben Harper , Haiyue Kang , Muhammad Usman , Martin Sevior This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 17:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords crosstalkquantum computingqubit addressabilitynoise mitigationsecurity vulnerabilitiessuperconducting qubitstrapped ions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Crosstalk noise inhibits individual qubit addressability and causes unintended interactions across all quantum computing platforms.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This review article establishes a comprehensive overview of crosstalk in quantum devices by surveying the literature across major physical systems. It focuses on the physical origins of crosstalk, methods to mitigate it, and the security vulnerabilities it creates. A reader would care because crosstalk is widely seen as one of the major problems preventing quantum computers from scaling beyond one or two qubits, yet detailed discussions are often neglected in benchmarking and algorithm descriptions. The review lowers the barrier for understanding different platforms by describing how mechanisms and severity vary significantly between them. It covers how these issues are addressed through device design, tuning, and mitigation techniques, while noting growing interest in security implications.

Core claim

Crosstalk noise derives from phenomena in quantum devices which inhibit individual addressability or cause unintended interactions among qubits. This review provides a comprehensive overview of crosstalk from quantum computing literature across a range of physical systems, focusing on physical origins, methods of mitigation and known consequential security vulnerabilities. Multiple crosstalk mechanisms are described for all major quantum computing platforms, which are usually implicitly addressed through device design, tuning, and mitigation techniques. Accelerating research regarding security implications is observed, with multiple avenues for further exploration, especially for non-superco

What carries the argument

crosstalk noise, the set of phenomena that inhibit individual addressability or cause unintended interactions among qubits

If this is right

  • Crosstalk must be addressed through design, tuning, and mitigation for any quantum platform to operate reliably beyond one or two qubits.
  • Device performance reports and algorithm benchmarks should include explicit crosstalk analysis rather than treating it as implicit.
  • Security research on crosstalk-induced vulnerabilities should expand beyond superconducting systems to other platforms.
  • A single reference covering origins and mitigations across platforms reduces the effort needed to study an unfamiliar quantum hardware type.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Placing platform-specific crosstalk details side by side may reveal common mitigation principles that could be adapted across hardware types.
  • The noted gap in security studies for non-superconducting systems points to a practical need for targeted experiments on ion traps or spin qubits.
  • Engineers building new quantum processors could treat the reviewed mitigation catalogue as a checklist during initial design rather than after fabrication.
  • If crosstalk remains unmitigated at larger scales, claims of quantum advantage for algorithms on real hardware will stay confined to small system sizes.

Load-bearing premise

The mechanisms and severity of crosstalk between platforms varies significantly, increasing the barrier of entry associated with understanding and performing research on unfamiliar quantum platforms.

What would settle it

An experimental demonstration of a multi-qubit device in which crosstalk is eliminated uniformly across platforms without platform-specific design or tuning would contradict the review's premise that crosstalk mechanisms and mitigations must be treated as platform-dependent.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.26528 by Ben Harper, Haiyue Kang, Martin Sevior, Muhammad Usman, Spiro Gicev.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Quantum computing platforms. a) The superconducting platform, which includes Google, IBM, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Examples crosstalk phenomena in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Crosstalk mitigation techniques. a) A heavy-hexagon lattice with connectivity of degree 3, requires [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Security vulnerabilities enabled by crosstalk in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Crosstalk noise derives from phenomena in quantum devices which inhibit individual addressability or cause unintended interactions among qubits. It is widely considered one of the major problems to be solved for a quantum computing platform to operate at scales beyond one or two qubits. Despite this, detailed discussion of crosstalk is often neglected when quantum device performance is described both in the context of device benchmarking and individual algorithm execution. Additionally, while the potential for crosstalk exists in all quantum platforms, the mechanisms and severity of crosstalk between platforms varies significantly, increasing the barrier of entry associated with understanding and performing research on unfamiliar quantum platforms. While previous work focused on theoretical formalism or platform specific details, in this review article, we provide a comprehensive overview of crosstalk from quantum computing literature across a range of physical systems focusing on physical origins, methods of mitigation and known consequential security vulnerabilities. We describe multiple crosstalk mechanisms for all major quantum computing platforms, which are usually implicitly addressed through device design, tuning, and mitigation techniques. We also observe accelerating research regarding security implications, however with multiple avenues for further exploration, especially for non-superconducting systems. Together, this review provides a comprehensive entry point for researchers and industry engineers interested in understanding and addressing the challenges arising from crosstalk phenomena in modern quantum computing systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a review article synthesizing existing literature on crosstalk noise in quantum devices. It covers physical origins, mitigation techniques, and security vulnerabilities across multiple quantum computing platforms, positioning itself as a comprehensive entry point for researchers while noting platform-specific variations and accelerating security research.

Significance. If the literature synthesis proves comprehensive and accurate, the review could serve as a useful consolidation that lowers barriers for cross-platform understanding of crosstalk, particularly by highlighting security implications. The absence of new derivations or experiments means its contribution rests entirely on the quality of coverage and synthesis rather than novel claims.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim of coverage for 'all major quantum computing platforms' would benefit from an explicit enumeration of the platforms discussed (e.g., superconducting, trapped-ion, photonic) to allow readers to assess completeness immediately.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence beginning 'While previous work focused on theoretical formalism...' contains a minor grammatical awkwardness ('in this review article, we provide'); consider rephrasing for smoother flow.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive summary of our review manuscript on crosstalk in contemporary quantum devices. The report recommends minor revision but provides no specific major comments to address. We will incorporate any minor suggestions during the revision process to improve clarity or coverage where appropriate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Review synthesis with no derivations or self-referential claims

full rationale

The manuscript is a review article whose central contribution is a literature synthesis of crosstalk mechanisms, mitigation, and security implications across quantum platforms. No equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or new formal results are present. All statements are descriptive summaries of external literature, with no load-bearing steps that reduce to self-citation chains, definitions, or inputs by construction. This matches the default expectation for non-circular review papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review article introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all content draws from cited prior literature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5753 in / 837 out tokens · 58263 ms · 2026-06-29T17:39:05.021390+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Non-Clifford Crosstalk Noise in Surface Codes Using Hybrid Stabilizer-Tensor Network Methods

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Hybrid simulations of coherent crosstalk noise in surface codes show higher logical error rates, lower thresholds, and quantitative dependence on noise distribution.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

193 extracted references · 115 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    crosstalk noise sources

    We thank Neil Dowling for discussions during the initial stages of this work. Appendix A: Theoretical Descriptions of Crosstalk Experimentally, crosstalk noise arises due to insufficient isolation between qubits or insuffi- cient individual addressability. While such ef- fects can vary significantly between platforms, more general theoretical discussion o...

  2. [2]

    a) CC BY 4.0 [1]

    Figure 1 Quantum computing platforms. a) CC BY 4.0 [1]. b) CC BY 4.0 [2]. c) CC BY 4.0 [3]. d) CC BY 4.0 [4]. e) CC BY 4.0 [5]. f) CC BY 4.0 [6]

  3. [3]

    a) CC BY 4.0 from the preprint at arXiv:2108.04530, which was later pub- lished as Ref

    Figure 2 Crosstalk phenomena. a) CC BY 4.0 from the preprint at arXiv:2108.04530, which was later pub- lished as Ref. [27]. b) CC BY 4.0 [28]. c) CC BY 4.0 [29]. d) CC BY 4.0 [30]. e) CC BY 4.0 [31]. f) CC BY 4.0 [32]

    work page arXiv

  4. [4]

    a) Original figure based on the description given in Ref

    Figure 3 Crosstalk mitigation techniques. a) Original figure based on the description given in Ref. [22]. b) CC BY 4.0 [127]. c) CC BY 4.0 [40]. d) CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 [51]. e) Adapted with permission from authors of Ref. [126]. f) Originalfigurebasedondescriptionsgiven in Refs. [43, 44]. 26

  5. [5]

    a) Adapted from Ref

    Figure 4 Crosstalk security vulnerabilities. a) Adapted from Ref. [147] with permission from the authors. b) CC BY 4.0 [67]. c) Original figure based on the description given in Ref. [154]. Assets from Ref. [147] were used with permission from the au- thors

  6. [6]

    Building logical qubits in a superconducting quantum computing system

    Jay M. Gambetta, Jerry M. Chow, and Matthias Steffen. “Building logical qubits in a superconducting quantum computing system”. npj Quantum Information3, 2 (2017). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41534-016-0004-0

    2017

  7. [7]

    Benchmarking a trapped-ion quan- tum computer with 30 qubits

    Jwo-Sy Chen, Erik Nielsen, Matthew Ebert, Volkan Inlek, Kenneth Wright, Vandiver Chaplin, Andrii Maksymov, Eduardo Páez, Amrit Poudel, Peter Maunz, and John Gam- ble. “Benchmarking a trapped-ion quan- tum computer with 30 qubits”. Quantum 8, 1516 (2024). doi:https://doi.org/10. 22331/q-2024-11-07-1516

    2024

  8. [8]

    Universal neutral-atom quantum computer with indi- vidual optical addressing and nondestructive readout

    A.G. Radnaev, W.C. Chung, D.C. Cole, D. Mason, T.G. Ballance, M.J. Bedalov, D.A. Belknap, M.R. Berman, M. Blakely, I.L. Bloomfield, P.D. Buttler, C. Camp- bell, A. Chopinaud, E. Copenhaver, M.K. Dawes, S.Y. Eubanks, A.J. Friss, D.M. Gar- cia, J. Gilbert, M. Gillette, P. Goiporia, P. Gokhale, J. Goldwin, D. Goodwin, T.M. Graham, C.J. Guttormsson, G.T. Hick...

    work page doi:10.1103/66s8-jj18 2025

  9. [9]

    A manufacturable plat- form for photonic quantum computing

    PsiQuantum team. “A manufacturable plat- form for photonic quantum computing”. Na- ture641, 876–883 (2025). doi:https://doi. org/10.1038/s41586-025-08820-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-08820-7 2025

  10. [10]

    As- sessment of the errors of high-fidelity two- qubit gates in silicon quantum dots

    Tuomo Tanttu, Wee Han Lim, Jonathan Y. Huang, Nard Dumoulin Stuyck, Will Gilbert, Rocky Y. Su, MengKe Feng, Jesus D. Ci- fuentes, Amanda E. Seedhouse, Stefan K. Ser- itan, Corey I. Ostrove, Kenneth M. Rudinger, Ross C. C. Leon, Wister Huang, Christo- pher C. Escott, Kohei M. Itoh, Nikolay V. Abrosimov, Hans-Joachim Pohl, Michael L. W. Thewalt, Fay E. Huds...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02614-w 2024

  11. [11]

    Bottom-up fabrication of scalable room-temperature diamond quantum com- puting and sensing technologies

    Lachlan Oberg, Cedric Weber, Hung-Hsiang Yang, Wolfgang M Klesse, Philipp Reinke, Santiago Corujeira Gallo, Alastair Stacey, Christopher I Pakes, and Marcus W Do- herty. “Bottom-up fabrication of scalable room-temperature diamond quantum com- puting and sensing technologies”. Materials for Quantum Technology5, 033001 (2025). doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/26...

    work page doi:10.1088/2633-4356/ 2025

  12. [12]

    Quantum computing

    Andrew Steane. “Quantum computing”. Re- ports on Progress in Physics61, 117 (1998). doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/ 61/2/002

    work page doi:10.1088/0034-4885/ 1998

  13. [13]

    Simulating physics with computers

    Richard P Feynman. “Simulating physics with computers”. International Journal of Theoretical Physics21, 467–488 (1982). doi:https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10. 1007/BF02650179

    1982

  14. [14]

    Quantum machine learning

    Jacob Biamonte, Peter Wittek, Nicola Pan- cotti, Patrick Rebentrost, Nathan Wiebe, and Seth Lloyd. “Quantum machine learning”. Nature549, 195–202 (2017). doi:https: 27 //doi.org/10.1038/nature23474

    work page doi:10.1038/nature23474 2017

  15. [15]

    A fast quantum me- chanical algorithm for database search

    Lov K. Grover. “A fast quantum me- chanical algorithm for database search”. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Comput- ing. Page 212–219. STOC ’96New York, NY, USA (1996). Association for Computing Machinery. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/ 237814.237866

    work page arXiv 1996

  16. [16]

    Algorithms for quantum com- putation: discrete logarithms and factoring

    P.W. Shor. “Algorithms for quantum com- putation: discrete logarithms and factoring”. In Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Pages 124–

  17. [17]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ SFCS.1994.365700

    (1994). doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ SFCS.1994.365700

    work page arXiv 1994

  18. [18]

    How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers with less than a million noisy qubits

    Craig Gidney. “How to factor 2048 bit rsa integers with less than a million noisy qubits” (2025). arXiv:2505.15917

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2048

  19. [19]

    Faster quantum chemistry simulations on a quantum computer with improved tensor factorization and active volume compilation

    Athena Caesura, Cristian L. Cortes, William Pol, Sukin Sim, Mark Steudtner, Gian- Luca R. Anselmetti, Matthias Degroote, Nikolaj Moll, Raffaele Santagati, Michael Streif, and Christofer S. Tautermann. “Faster quantum chemistry simulations on a quantum computer with improved tensor factorization and active volume compilation”. PRX Quan- tum6, 030337 (2025)...

    work page doi:10.1103/yngp-5fpm 2025

  20. [20]

    A series of fast- paced advances in quantum error cor- rection

    Earl Campbell. “A series of fast- paced advances in quantum error cor- rection”. Nature Reviews Physics 6, 160–161 (2024). doi:https: //doi.org/10.1038/s42254-024-00706-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-024-00706-3 2024

  21. [21]

    Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond

    John Preskill. “Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond”. Quantum2, 79 (2018). doi:https://doi.org/10.22331/ q-2018-08-06-79

    2018

  22. [22]

    Mind the gaps: The fraught road to quantum advantage

    Jens Eisert and John Preskill. “Mind the gaps: The fraught road to quantum advan- tage” (2025). arXiv:2510.19928

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Detecting crosstalk errors in quantum information processors

    Mohan Sarovar, Timothy Proctor, Kenneth Rudinger, Kevin Young, Erik Nielsen, and Robin Blume-Kohout. “Detecting crosstalk errors in quantum information processors”. Quantum4, 321 (2020). doi:https://doi. org/10.22331/q-2020-09-11-321

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2020-09-11-321 2020

  24. [24]

    Ran- domized benchmarking of quantum gates

    E. Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle, J. Britton, R. B. Blakestad, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Oz- eri, S. Seidelin, and D. J. Wineland. “Ran- domized benchmarking of quantum gates”. Phys. Rev. A77, 012307 (2008). doi:https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.012307

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.77.012307 2008

  25. [25]

    Characterization of addressability by simultaneous random- ized benchmarking

    Jay M. Gambetta, A. D. Córcoles, S. T. Merkel, B. R. Johnson, John A. Smolin, Jerry M. Chow, Colm A. Ryan, Chad Rigetti, S. Poletto, Thomas A. Ohki, Mark B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen. “Characterization of addressability by simultaneous random- ized benchmarking”. Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 240504 (2012). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.109.240504

    2012

  26. [26]

    Quantum characteriza- tion, verification, and validation

    Robin Blume-Kohout, Timothy Proctor, and Kevin Young. “Quantum characteriza- tion, verification, and validation” (2025). arXiv:2503.16383

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Exponential sup- pression of bit or phase errors with cyclic error correction

    Google Quantum AI. “Exponential sup- pression of bit or phase errors with cyclic error correction”. Nature595, 383– 387 (2021). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41586-021-03588-y

    2021

  28. [28]

    Topological and subsystem codes on low-degree graphs with flag qubits

    Christopher Chamberland, Guanyu Zhu, Theodore J. Yoder, Jared B. Hertzberg, and Andrew W. Cross. “Topological and subsystem codes on low-degree graphs with flag qubits”. Phys. Rev. X10, 011022 (2020). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevX.10.011022

    2020

  29. [29]

    Reducing unitary and spectator errors in cross resonance with optimized rotary echoes

    Neereja Sundaresan, Isaac Lauer, Emily Pritchett, Easwar Magesan, Petar Jurcevic, and Jay M. Gambetta. “Reducing unitary and spectator errors in cross resonance with optimized rotary echoes”. PRX Quantum1, 020318 (2020). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PRXQuantum.1.020318

    2020

  30. [30]

    Quantifying the effects of local many- qubit errors and nonlocal two-qubit errors on the surface code

    Austin G. Fowler and John M. Marti- nis. “Quantifying the effects of local many- qubit errors and nonlocal two-qubit errors on the surface code”. Phys. Rev. A89, 032316 (2014). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.89.032316

    2014

  31. [31]

    A sur- vey and tutorial on security and resilience of quantum computing

    Abdullah Ash Saki, Mahabubul Alam, Kous- tubh Phalak, Aakarshitha Suresh, Rasit Onur Topaloglu, and Swaroop Ghosh. “A sur- vey and tutorial on security and resilience of quantum computing”. In 2021 IEEE Eu- ropean Test Symposium (ETS). Pages 1–

    2021

  32. [32]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ ETS50041.2021.9465397

    (2021). doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ ETS50041.2021.9465397

    work page arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    Se- curity vulnerabilities in quantum cloud sys- tems: A survey on emerging threats

    Justin Coupel and Tasnuva Farheen. “Se- curity vulnerabilities in quantum cloud sys- tems: A survey on emerging threats” (2025). arXiv:2504.19064

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Suppression of crosstalk in superconducting qubits using dynam- 28 ical decoupling

    Vinay Tripathi, Huo Chen, Mostafa Khezri, Ka-Wa Yip, E.M. Levenson-Falk, and Daniel A. Lidar. “Suppression of crosstalk in superconducting qubits using dynam- 28 ical decoupling”. Phys. Rev. Appl.18, 024068 (2022). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevApplied.18.024068

    2022

  35. [35]

    Crosstalk suppres- sion for fault-tolerant quantum error correction with trapped ions

    Pedro Parrado-Rodríguez, Ciarán Ryan- Anderson, Alejandro Bermudez, and Markus Müller. “Crosstalk suppres- sion for fault-tolerant quantum error correction with trapped ions”. Quan- tum5, 487 (2021). doi:https: //doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-06-29-487

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-06-29-487 2021

  36. [36]

    Enabling fast and ac- curate neutral atom readout through image denoising

    Chaithanya Naik Mude, Linipun Phuttitarn, Satvik Maurya, Kunal Sinha, Mark Saffman, and Swamit Tannu. “Enabling fast and ac- curate neutral atom readout through image denoising” (2025). arXiv:2510.25982

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Resource-efficient crosstalk mitigation for the high-fidelity operation of photonic integrated circuits with induced phase shifters

    Andreas Fyrillas, Nicolas Heurtel, Simone Pi- acentini, Nicolas Maring, Jean Senellart, and Nadia Belabas. “Resource-efficient crosstalk mitigation for the high-fidelity operation of photonic integrated circuits with induced phase shifters” (2025). arXiv:2506.05988

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Robust and localised control of a 10-spin qubit array in germanium

    Valentin John, Cécile X. Yu, Barnaby van Straaten, Esteban A. Rodríguez-Mena, Mauricio Rodríguez, Stefan D. Oosterhout, Lucas E. A. Stehouwer, Giordano Scap- pucci, Maximilian Rimbach-Russ, Stefano Bosco, Francesco Borsoi, Yann-Michel Ni- quet, and Menno Veldhorst. “Robust and localised control of a 10-spin qubit array in germanium”. Nature Communications...

    2025

  39. [39]

    A ten-qubit solid-state spin regis- ter with quantum memory up to one minute

    C. E. Bradley, J. Randall, M. H. Abobeih, R. C. Berrevoets, M. J. Degen, M. A. Bakker, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and T. H. Taminiau. “A ten-qubit solid-state spin regis- ter with quantum memory up to one minute”. Phys. Rev. X9, 031045 (2019). doi:https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.9.031045

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.031045 2019

  40. [40]

    Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the cooper pair box

    Jens Koch, Terri M. Yu, Jay Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, Alexandre Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf. “Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the cooper pair box”. Phys. Rev. A76, 042319 (2007). doi:https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.042319

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.76.042319 2007

  41. [41]

    Super- conducting quantum bits

    John Clarke and Frank K. Wilhelm. “Super- conducting quantum bits”. Nature453, 1031– 1042 (2008). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature07128

    2008

  42. [42]

    Su- perconducting circuits for quantum informa- tion: An outlook

    M. H. Devoret and R. J. Schoelkopf. “Su- perconducting circuits for quantum informa- tion: An outlook”. Science339, 1169– 1174 (2013). doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1231930

    2013

  43. [43]

    A quantum engineer’s guide to supercon- ducting qubits

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver. “A quantum engineer’s guide to supercon- ducting qubits”. Applied Physics Reviews 6, 021318 (2019). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1063/1.5089550

    2019

  44. [44]

    Efficientzgates for quan- tum computing

    David C. McKay, Christopher J. Wood, Sarah Sheldon, Jerry M. Chow, and Jay M. Gambetta. “Efficientzgates for quan- tum computing”. Phys. Rev. A96, 022330 (2017). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.96.022330

    2017

  45. [45]

    Fully microwave-tunable universal gates in super- conducting qubits with linear couplings and fixed transition frequencies

    Chad Rigetti and Michel Devoret. “Fully microwave-tunable universal gates in super- conducting qubits with linear couplings and fixed transition frequencies”. Phys. Rev. B 81, 134507(2010). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevB.81.134507

    2010

  46. [46]

    Procedure for systematically tuning up cross-talk in the cross-resonance gate

    Sarah Sheldon, Easwar Magesan, Jerry M. Chow, and Jay M. Gambetta. “Procedure for systematically tuning up cross-talk in the cross-resonance gate”. Phys. Rev. A93, 060302 (2016). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.93.060302

    2016

  47. [47]

    Tunable coupling architecture for fixed-frequency transmon su- perconducting qubits

    J. Stehlik, D. M. Zajac, D. L. Underwood, T. Phung, J. Blair, S. Carnevale, D. Klaus, G. A. Keefe, A. Carniol, M. Kumph, Matthias Steffen, and O. E. Dial. “Tunable coupling architecture for fixed-frequency transmon su- perconducting qubits”. Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 080505 (2021). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.127.080505

    2021

  48. [48]

    Effective hamiltonian models of the cross- resonance gate

    Easwar Magesan and Jay M. Gambetta. “Effective hamiltonian models of the cross- resonance gate”. Phys. Rev. A101, 052308 (2020). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.101.052308

    2020

  49. [49]

    Software mitigation of crosstalk on noisy intermediate- scale quantum computers

    Prakash Murali, David C. Mckay, Margaret Martonosi, and Ali Javadi-Abhari. “Software mitigation of crosstalk on noisy intermediate- scale quantum computers”. In Proceed- ings of the Twenty-Fifth International Con- ference on Architectural Support for Pro- gramming Languages and Operating Systems. Page 1001–1016. ASPLOS ’20New York, NY, USA (2020). Associa...

    work page arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Multi-qubit dynam- ical decoupling for enhanced crosstalk 29 suppression

    Siyuan Niu, Aida Todri-Sanial, and Nicholas T Bronn. “Multi-qubit dynam- ical decoupling for enhanced crosstalk 29 suppression”. Quantum Science and Tech- nology9, 045003 (2024). doi:https: //doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ad5a37

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ad5a37 2024

  51. [51]

    Syncopated dynamical decoupling for suppressing crosstalk in quantum cir- cuits

    Bram Evert, Zoe Gonzalez Izquierdo, James Sud, Hong-Ye Hu, Shon Grabbe, Eleanor G. Rieffel, Matthew J. Reagor, and Zhihui Wang. “Syncopated dynamical decoupling for suppressing crosstalk in quantum cir- cuits” (2024). arXiv:2403.07836

    work page arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    Experimental characteri- zation, modeling, and analysis of crosstalk in a quantum computer

    Abdullah Ash-Saki, Mahabubul Alam, and Swaroop Ghosh. “Experimental characteri- zation, modeling, and analysis of crosstalk in a quantum computer”. IEEE Trans- actions on Quantum Engineering1, 1– 6 (2020). doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ TQE.2020.3023338

    work page arXiv 2020

  53. [53]

    Hamiltonian engineering with mul- ticolor drives for fast entangling gates and quantum crosstalk cancellation

    K. X. Wei, E. Magesan, I. Lauer, S. Srini- vasan, D. F. Bogorin, S. Carnevale, G. A. Keefe, Y. Kim, D. Klaus, W. Landers, N. Sun- daresan, C. Wang, E. J. Zhang, M. Stef- fen, O. E. Dial, D. C. McKay, and A. Kan- dala. “Hamiltonian engineering with mul- ticolor drives for fast entangling gates and quantum crosstalk cancellation”. Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 06050...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.060501 2022

  54. [54]

    Benchmarking quan- tum processor performance at scale

    David C. McKay, Ian Hincks, Emily J. Pritch- ett, Malcolm Carroll, Luke C. G. Govia, and Seth T. Merkel. “Benchmarking quan- tum processor performance at scale” (2023). arXiv:2311.05933

    work page arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    Impact of spectators on a two-qubit gate in a tunable coupling superconducting circuit

    T.-Q. Cai, X.-Y. Han, Y.-K. Wu, Y.-L. Ma, J.-H. Wang, Z.-L. Wang, H.-Y Zhang, H.-Y Wang, Y.-P. Song, and L.-M. Duan. “Impact of spectators on a two-qubit gate in a tunable coupling superconducting circuit”. Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 060505 (2021). doi:https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.060505

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.060505 2021

  56. [56]

    Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit

    Google Quantum AI. “Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit”. Nature614, 676–681 (2023). doi:https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1 2023

  57. [57]

    Quantum error correction below the sur- face code threshold

    Google Quantum AI and Collaborators. “Quantum error correction below the sur- face code threshold”. Nature638, 920– 926 (2025). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41586-024-08449-y

    2025

  58. [58]

    Characterizing and mitigating flux crosstalk in superconducting qubits-couplers system

    Chen-Hsun Ma, Myrron Albert Callera Aguila, Nien-Yu Li, Li-Chieh Hsiao, Yi- ShiangHuang, Yen-ChunChen, Teik-HuiLee, Chin-Chia Chang, Jyh-Yang Wang, Ssu-Yen Huang, Hsi-Sheng Goan, Chiao-Hsuan Wang, Cen-Shawn Wu, Chii-Dong Chen, and Chung- Ting Ke. “Characterizing and mitigating flux crosstalk in superconducting qubits-couplers system” (2025). arXiv:2508.03434

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Quantum trajectory approach to circuit qed: Quantum jumps and the zeno effect

    Jay Gambetta, Alexandre Blais, M. Bois- sonneault, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, and S. M. Girvin. “Quantum trajectory approach to circuit qed: Quantum jumps and the zeno effect”. Phys. Rev. A77, 012112 (2008). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.77.012112

    2008

  60. [60]

    Ma- chine learning for discriminating quan- tum measurement trajectories and improv- ing readout

    Easwar Magesan, Jay M. Gambetta, A. D. Córcoles, and Jerry M. Chow. “Ma- chine learning for discriminating quan- tum measurement trajectories and improv- ing readout”. Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 200501 (2015). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.114.200501

    2015

  61. [61]

    Measuring error rates of mid-circuit measurements

    Daniel Hothem, Jordan Hines, Charles Bald- win, Dan Gresh, Robin Blume-Kohout, and Timothy Proctor. “Measuring error rates of mid-circuit measurements”. Nature Commu- nications16, 5761 (2025). doi:https://doi. org/10.1038/s41467-025-60923-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-025-60923-x 2025

  62. [62]

    Miti- gating measurement crosstalk via pulse shap- ing

    Yang Gao, Feiyu Li, Yang Liu, Zhen Yang, Jiayu Ding, Wuerkaixi Nuerbolati, Ruixia Wang, Tang Su, Yanjun Ma, Yirong Jin, Haifeng Yu, He Wang, and Fei Yan. “Miti- gating measurement crosstalk via pulse shap- ing” (2025). arXiv:2509.05437

    work page arXiv 2025

  63. [63]

    Ef- ficient and scalable architectures for multi- level superconducting qubit readout

    Chaithanya Naik Mude, Satvik Maurya, Ben- jamin Lienhard, and Swamit Tannu. “Ef- ficient and scalable architectures for multi- level superconducting qubit readout” (2025). arXiv:2405.08982

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Enhancing qubit readout with autoencoders

    Piero Luchi, Paolo E. Trevisanutto, Alessan- dro Roggero, Jonathan L. DuBois, Yaniv J. Rosen, Francesco Turro, Valentina Amitrano, and Francesco Pederiva. “Enhancing qubit readout with autoencoders”. Phys. Rev. Appl. 20, 014045(2023). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevApplied.20.014045

    2023

  65. [65]

    Deep-neural- network discrimination of multiplexed superconducting-qubit states

    Benjamin Lienhard, Antti Vepsäläinen, Luke C.G. Govia, Cole R. Hoffer, Jack Y. Qiu, Diego Ristè, Matthew Ware, David Kim, Roni Winik, Alexander Melville, Bethany Niedzielski, Jonilyn Yoder, Guil- hem J. Ribeill, Thomas A. Ohki, Hari K. Krovi, Terry P. Orlando, Simon Gustavsson, and William D. Oliver. “Deep-neural- network discrimination of multiplexed sup...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.17.014024 2022

  66. [66]

    Quantum crosstalk analysis for simultaneous gate operations on superconducting qubits

    Peng Zhao, Kehuan Linghu, Zhiyuan Li, Peng Xu, Ruixia Wang, Guangming Xue, Yirong Jin, and Haifeng Yu. “Quantum crosstalk analysis for simultaneous gate operations on superconducting qubits”. PRX Quantum3, 020301 (2022). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PRXQuantum.3.020301

    2022

  67. [67]

    Suppression of midcircuit measurement crosstalk errors with micromotion

    J. P. Gaebler, C. H. Baldwin, S. A. Moses, J. M. Dreiling, C. Figgatt, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, and J. M. Pino. “Suppression of midcircuit measurement crosstalk errors with micromotion”. Phys. Rev. A104, 062440 (2021). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.104.062440

    2021

  68. [68]

    High-fidelity indirect read- out of trapped-ion hyperfine qubits

    Stephen D. Erickson, Jenny J. Wu, Pan-Yu Hou, Daniel C. Cole, Shawn Geller, Alex Kwiatkowski, Scott Glancy, Emanuel Knill, DanielH.Slichter, AndrewC.Wilson, andDi- etrich Leibfried. “High-fidelity indirect read- out of trapped-ion hyperfine qubits”. Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 160503 (2022). doi:https:// doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.160503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.128.160503 2022

  69. [69]

    Re- alization of a crosstalk-avoided quantum net- work node using dual-type qubits of the same ion species

    L. Feng, Y.-Y. Huang, Y.-K. Wu, W.-X. Guo, J.-Y. Ma, H.-X. Yang, L. Zhang, Y. Wang, C.-X. Huang, C. Zhang, L. Yao, B.-X. Qi, Y.- F. Pu, Z.-C. Zhou, and L.-M. Duan. “Re- alization of a crosstalk-avoided quantum net- work node using dual-type qubits of the same ion species”. Nature Communications15, 204 (2024). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-023-44220-z

    2024

  70. [70]

    Design and characterization of individual address- ing optics based on multi-channel acousto- optic modulator for 171yb+ qubits

    Sungjoo Lim, Seunghyun Baek, Jacob Whit- low, Marissa D’ Onofrio, Tianyi Chen, Samuel Phiri, Stephen Crain, Kenneth R. Brown, Jungsang Kim, and Junki Kim. “Design and characterization of individual address- ing optics based on multi-channel acousto- optic modulator for 171yb+ qubits”. Op- tics & Laser Technology180, 111436 (2025). doi:https://doi.org/http...

    work page arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Crosstalk Insensitive Trapped-Ion Entanglement through Coupling Matrix Engineering

    Vikram Kashyap, Caleb Walton, and Sara Mouradian. “Crosstalk insensitive trapped- ion entanglement through coupling matrix en- gineering” (2025). arXiv:2508.20329

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  72. [72]

    A trapped-ion-based quan- tum byte with 10−5 next-neighbour cross- talk

    C. Piltz, T. Sriarunothai, A. F. Varón, and C. Wunderlich. “A trapped-ion-based quan- tum byte with 10−5 next-neighbour cross- talk”. NatureCommunications5, 4679(2014). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5679

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms5679 2014

  73. [73]

    Two-qubit entangling gates within arbitrarilylong chains of trapped ions

    K. A. Landsman, Y. Wu, P. H. Leung, D. Zhu, N. M. Linke, K. R. Brown, L. Duan, and C. Monroe. “Two-qubit entangling gates within arbitrarilylong chains of trapped ions”. Phys. Rev. A100, 022332 (2019). doi:https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.100.022332

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.100.022332 2019

  74. [74]

    Evaluation of noise and crosstalk in neutral atom quantum computers

    Pranet Sharma, Yizhuo Tan, Konstantinos- Nikolaos Papadopoulos, and Jakub Sze- fer. “Evaluation of noise and crosstalk in neutral atom quantum computers” (2025). arXiv:2507.22140

    work page arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    Midcircuit qubit measurement and rearrangement in a171Ybatomic array

    M. A. Norcia, W. B. Cairncross, K. Barnes, P. Battaglino, A. Brown, M. O. Brown, K. Cassella, C.-A. Chen, R. Coxe, D. Crow, J. Epstein, C. Griger, A. M. W. Jones, H. Kim, J. M. Kindem, J. King, S. S. Kon- dov, K. Kotru, J. Lauigan, M. Li, M. Lu, E. Megidish, J. Marjanovic, M. McDonald, T. Mittiga, J. A. Muniz, S. Narayanaswami, C. Nishiguchi, R. Notermans...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.041034 2023

  76. [76]

    En- hanced measurement of neutral-atom qubits with machine learning

    L. Phuttitarn, B. M. Becker, R. Chinnarasu, T. M. Graham, and M. Saffman. “En- hanced measurement of neutral-atom qubits with machine learning”. Phys. Rev. Appl. 22, 024011(2024). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevApplied.22.024011

    2024

  77. [77]

    Continuous operation of large-scale atom ar- rays in optical lattices

    Flavien Gyger, Maximilian Ammenwerth, Renhao Tao, Hendrik Timme, Stepan Sni- girev, Immanuel Bloch, and Johannes Zeiher. “Continuous operation of large-scale atom ar- rays in optical lattices”. Phys. Rev. Res.6, 033104 (2024). doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevResearch.6.033104

    2024

  78. [78]

    Switch networks for photonic fusion-based quantum computing

    Sara Bartolucci, Patrick Birchall, Damien Bonneau, Hugo Cable, Mercedes Gimeno- Segovia, Konrad Kieling, Naomi Nickerson, Terry Rudolph, and Chris Sparrow. “Switch networks for photonic fusion-based quantum computing” (2021). arXiv:2109.13760

    work page arXiv 2021

  79. [79]

    Quantum transport simulations in a pro- grammable nanophotonic processor

    Nicholas C. Harris, Gregory R. Steinbrecher, Mihika Prabhu, Yoav Lahini, Jacob Mower, Darius Bunandar, Changchen Chen, Franco N. C. Wong, Tom Baehr-Jones, Michael Hochberg, Seth Lloyd, and Dirk Englund. “Quantum transport simulations in a pro- grammable nanophotonic processor”. Nature Photonics11, 447–452 (2017). doi:https: //doi.org/10.1038/nphoton.2017.95. 31

    work page doi:10.1038/nphoton.2017.95 2017

  80. [80]

    Unscrambling light— automatically undoing strong mixing between modes

    Andrea Annoni, Emanuele Guglielmi, Marco Carminati, Giorgio Ferrari, Marco Sampi- etro, David AB Miller, Andrea Melloni, and Francesco Morichetti. “Unscrambling light— automatically undoing strong mixing between modes”. Light: Science & Applications6, e17110–e17110 (2017). doi:https://doi. org/10.1038/lsa.2017.110

    work page doi:10.1038/lsa.2017.110 2017

Showing first 80 references.