pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00660 · v1 · pith:MIDMDLOQnew · submitted 2026-07-01 · 🪐 quant-ph

Overcoming the Speed-Fidelity Trade-off in Fast CZ Gates via Cyclic Control

Ze-An Zhao , Hai-Feng Zhang , Tian-Le Wang , Xiao-Yan Yang , Peng Wang , Ren-Ze Zhao , Sheng Zhang , Zhi-Fei Li
show 5 more authors
Yuan Wu Zi-Hao Fu Sheng-Ri Liu Peng Duan Guo-Ping Guo
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 12:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords superconducting qubitscontrolled-Z gatequantum controlcoherent errorfast gatescyclic evolutionparameter space expansionwaveform distortion
0
0 comments X

The pith

Expanding the control parameter space overcomes the speed-fidelity trade-off in fast superconducting CZ gates.

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

The paper establishes that short-timescale waveform distortions break time-reflection symmetry in fast control pulses, leaving conventional symmetric protocols unable to close cyclic evolution without extending gate duration. By introducing a cyclic control strategy that expands the parameter space with one extra degree of freedom, the authors restore the ability to cancel coherent errors while holding the gate time fixed. They implement the approach on a superconducting controlled-Z gate and report a measured drop in average coherent error from 0.27 percent to 0.12 percent across several two-qubit devices, confirmed by cross-entropy benchmarking. A reader would care because scalable quantum processors need fast, high-fidelity two-qubit operations to keep total error below threshold. The work therefore offers a concrete route around the usual speed-versus-accuracy compromise.

Core claim

The central claim is that a cyclic control strategy based on parameter-space expansion restores controllability by incorporating an additional degree of freedom. This enables robust suppression of coherent errors in fast CZ gates without increasing gate duration. The approach is demonstrated experimentally in superconducting qubits, where the average coherent error across multiple two-qubit gates falls from 0.27 percent to 0.12 percent as validated by cross-entropy benchmarking. The result supplies a general method for fast, high-fidelity cyclic quantum gates that avoids the conventional speed-fidelity trade-off.

What carries the argument

Parameter-space expansion that adds one extra degree of freedom to the cyclic control protocol, allowing the evolution to close despite broken time-reflection symmetry caused by short-timescale waveform distortions.

If this is right

  • Coherent errors in fast two-qubit gates can be suppressed while keeping the original gate duration unchanged.
  • The method supplies a general route to fast high-fidelity cyclic quantum gates that bypasses conventional smoothing or embedding strategies.
  • Cross-entropy benchmarking on multiple devices confirms the error reduction is repeatable.
  • The same parameter-expansion principle applies to any cyclic gate limited by waveform symmetry breaking.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The extra control freedom could be tuned further to reach even lower error rates on the same hardware.
  • The technique may transfer to other qubit platforms that suffer analogous short-timescale pulse distortions.
  • Shorter gate times enabled by this approach could reduce accumulated error in longer quantum algorithms.
  • Systematic mapping of the expanded parameter space might reveal optimal operating points not accessible to symmetric protocols.

Load-bearing premise

The added degree of freedom can be realized experimentally without introducing new coherent or incoherent errors or requiring increased gate duration.

What would settle it

An experiment applying the expanded-parameter cyclic protocol that finds no reduction in coherent error below 0.27 percent or that requires longer gate duration would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00660 by Guo-Ping Guo, Hai-Feng Zhang, Peng Duan, Peng Wang, Ren-Ze Zhao, Sheng-Ri Liu, Sheng Zhang, Tian-Le Wang, Xiao-Yan Yang, Yuan Wu, Ze-An Zhao, Zhi-Fei Li, Zi-Hao Fu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

High-fidelity quantum gates are essential for scalable quantum computation. However, at short durations, short-timescale waveform distortions break the time-reflection symmetry of control pulses, preventing the precise closure of cyclic evolution. This mechanism renders conventional symmetric protocols intrinsically over-constrained. Conventional strategies typically rely on smoothing the pulse envelopes or embedding the interaction pulse within a longer qubit pulse to bypass short-timescale distortions, which inevitably leads to a persistent speed-fidelity trade-off. To overcome this limitation, we introduce a cyclic control strategy based on parameter-space expansion, which restores controllability by incorporating an additional degree of freedom. We experimentally demonstrate this approach in a superconducting controlled-Z gate, achieving robust suppression of coherent errors without increasing gate duration, reducing the average coherent error from 0.27% to 0.12% across multiple two-qubit gates, as validated by cross-entropy benchmarking. Our results establish a general route to fast, high-fidelity cyclic quantum gates beyond the conventional speed-fidelity trade-off.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that short-timescale waveform distortions break time-reflection symmetry in fast control pulses, rendering conventional symmetric protocols over-constrained for CZ gates. It introduces a cyclic control strategy via parameter-space expansion that adds an extra degree of freedom to restore controllability. Experimentally, on superconducting qubits, this suppresses coherent errors without increasing gate duration, reducing average coherent error from 0.27% to 0.12% across multiple two-qubit gates as measured by cross-entropy benchmarking.

Significance. If the attribution to the new degree of freedom is isolated and the result holds with proper controls, the work offers a route to high-fidelity fast gates that could impact scalable quantum computation by relaxing the speed-fidelity trade-off.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the reported reduction in coherent error (0.27% to 0.12%) via cross-entropy benchmarking provides no error bars, sample sizes, or controls for other error sources, and does not describe how the extra degree of freedom was implemented or isolated while holding all other pulse parameters fixed; this is load-bearing for the central experimental claim.
  2. [Abstract] The assumption that short-timescale waveform distortions are the dominant symmetry-breaking mechanism (and that the added degree of freedom introduces neither new coherent/incoherent errors nor extra duration) is stated but not isolated from other hardware effects; without a direct toggle experiment the attribution remains unsecured.
minor comments (1)
  1. Notation for the additional degree of freedom and the cyclic evolution closure condition should be defined explicitly early in the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the need for greater clarity in the abstract regarding statistical details and experimental isolation. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the presentation of the central claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the reported reduction in coherent error (0.27% to 0.12%) via cross-entropy benchmarking provides no error bars, sample sizes, or controls for other error sources, and does not describe how the extra degree of freedom was implemented or isolated while holding all other pulse parameters fixed; this is load-bearing for the central experimental claim.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from additional detail on these points to better support the central claim. In the revised manuscript we have updated the abstract to report error bars on the coherent-error values, the number of experimental repetitions underlying the cross-entropy benchmarking averages, and a concise statement of how the extra degree of freedom is introduced via parameter-space expansion while all other pulse parameters (including total duration) remain fixed. The full isolation procedure—comparing the conventional symmetric protocol against the cyclic-control protocol under otherwise identical conditions—is described in the methods and results sections, together with the controls already present in the benchmarking protocol for separating coherent from incoherent contributions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The assumption that short-timescale waveform distortions are the dominant symmetry-breaking mechanism (and that the added degree of freedom introduces neither new coherent/incoherent errors nor extra duration) is stated but not isolated from other hardware effects; without a direct toggle experiment the attribution remains unsecured.

    Authors: We acknowledge that a direct experimental toggle on the short-timescale distortions themselves would provide the strongest possible isolation. Such a toggle is not feasible with the present hardware without introducing uncontrolled variables. Instead, the revised manuscript adds (i) a side-by-side experimental comparison in which only the additional cyclic-control parameter is varied while gate duration and all other waveform parameters are held constant, and (ii) supporting numerical simulations that explicitly include the measured distortion profile and demonstrate that the observed error reduction is accounted for by restoration of cyclic evolution. We have also expanded the discussion to address possible confounding hardware effects and to explain why they are inconsistent with the data. These additions make the attribution more secure while remaining within the experimental capabilities of the platform. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; result is experimental demonstration.

full rationale

The paper presents an experimental demonstration of a cyclic control strategy for fast CZ gates, reporting measured error reduction (0.27% to 0.12%) via cross-entropy benchmarking after introducing an additional degree of freedom. No equations, predictions, or derivations are provided in the abstract or described claims that reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-citations, or ansatzes. The central claim rests on hardware validation rather than a tautological mathematical chain, making the derivation self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; the central claim rests on standard quantum control assumptions and the experimental claim that the added degree of freedom compensates distortions without new errors. No explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Quantum mechanics and superconducting qubit dynamics allow cyclic evolution under control pulses
    Invoked implicitly to define the symmetry-breaking problem and the need for closure of cyclic evolution.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5744 in / 1427 out tokens · 32163 ms · 2026-07-02T12:15:43.066340+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buell, et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable supercon- ducting processor, Nature574, 505 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Wu, W.-S

    Y . Wu, W.-S. Bao, S. Cao, F. Chen, M.-C. Chen, X. Chen, T.-H. Chung, H. Deng, Y . Du, D. Fan,et al., Strong quantum compu- tational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor, Physical review letters127, 180501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Zhong, Y .-H

    H.-S. Zhong, Y .-H. Deng, J. Qin, H. Wang, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y .-H. Luo, D. Wu, S.-Q. Gong, H. Su,et al., Phase-programmable gaussian boson sampling using stimu- lated squeezed light, Physical review letters127, 180502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Krinner, N

    S. Krinner, N. Lacroix, A. Remm, A. Di Paolo, E. Genois, 5 C. Leroux, C. Hellings, S. Lazar, F. Swiadek, J. Herrmann, et al., Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code, Nature605, 669 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Asfaw, A

    A. Asfaw, A. Megrant, C. Jones, C. Gidney, D. Bacon, D. De- broy, D. Kafri, E. Lucero, H. Neven, J. Hilton,et al., Suppress- ing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit, Na- ture614, 676 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold, Na- ture638, 920 (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Eickbusch, M

    A. Eickbusch, M. McEwen, V . Sivak, A. Bourassa, J. Atalaya, J. Claes, D. Kafri, C. Gidney, C. W. Warren, J. Gross,et al., Demonstration of dynamic surface codes, Nature Physics , 1 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Lacroix, A

    N. Lacroix, A. Bourassa, F. J. Heras, L. M. Zhang, J. Bausch, A. W. Senior, T. Edlich, N. Shutty, V . Sivak, A. Bengtsson, et al., Scaling and logic in the color code on a superconduct- ing quantum processor, Nature , 1 (2025)

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Bravyi, A

    S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory, Nature627, 778 (2024)

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    K. Wang, Z. Lu, C. Zhang, G. Liu, J. Chen, Y . Wang, Y . Wu, S. Xu, X. Zhu, F. Jin, Y . Gao, Z. Tan, Z. Cui, N. Wang, Y . Zou, A. Zhang, T. Li, F. Shen, J. Zhong, Z. Bao, Z. Zhu, Y . Han, Y . He, J. Shen, H. Wang, J.-N. Yang, Z. Song, J. Deng, H. Dong, Z.-Z. Sun, W. Li, Q. Ye, S. Jiang, Y . Ma, P.-X. Shen, P. Zhang, H. Li, Q. Guo, Z. Wang, C. Song, H. Wan...

    work page arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Y . Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. X. Wei, E. van den Berg, S. Rosenblatt, H. Nayfeh, Y . Wu, M. Zaletel, K. Temme, and A. Kandala, Evidence for the utility of quantum computing be- fore fault tolerance, Nature618, 500 (2023)

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    S. Cao, B. Wu, F. Chen, M. Gong, Y . Wu, Y . Ye, C. Zha, H. Qian, C. Ying, S. Guo,et al., Generation of genuine en- tanglement up to 51 superconducting qubits, Nature619, 738 (2023)

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    R. S. Gupta, N. Sundaresan, T. Alexander, C. J. Wood, S. T. Merkel, M. B. Healy, M. Hillenbrand, T. Jochym-O’Connor, J. R. Wootton, T. J. Yoder,et al., Encoding a magic state with beyond break-even fidelity, Nature625, 259 (2024)

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    B. M. Terhal, Mobile atoms enable efficient computation with logical qubits, Nature626, 36 (2024)

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    S. Guo, J. Sun, H. Qian, M. Gong, Y . Zhang, F. Chen, Y . Ye, Y . Wu, S. Cao, K. Liu,et al., Experimental quantum computa- tional chemistry with optimized unitary coupled cluster ansatz, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    C. J. Ballance, T. P. Harty, N. M. Linke, M. A. Sepiol, and D. M. Lucas, High-fidelity quantum logic gates using trapped-ion hy- perfine qubits, Physical review letters117, 060504 (2016)

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    R. T. Sutherland, R. Srinivas, and D. Allcock, Individual ad- dressing of trapped ion qubits with geometric phase gates, Physical Review A107, 032604 (2023)

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    Sekiguchi, N

    Y . Sekiguchi, N. Niikura, R. Kuroiwa, H. Kano, and H. Kosaka, Optical holonomic single quantum gates with a geometric spin under a zero field, Nature photonics11, 309 (2017)

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Nagata, K

    K. Nagata, K. Kuramitani, Y . Sekiguchi, and H. Kosaka, Uni- versal holonomic quantum gates over geometric spin qubits with polarised microwaves, Nature communications9, 3227 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    F. W. Strauch, P. R. Johnson, A. J. Dragt, C. Lobb, J. Anderson, and F. Wellstood, Quantum logic gates for coupled supercon- ducting phase qubits, Physical review letters91, 167005 (2003)

    work page 2003

  21. [21]

    DiCarlo, J

    L. DiCarlo, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. S. Bishop, B. R. Johnson, D. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, S. Girvin, et al., Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a supercon- ducting quantum processor, Nature460, 240 (2009)

    work page 2009

  22. [22]

    Barends, C

    R. Barends, C. Quintana, A. Petukhov, Y . Chen, D. Kafri, K. Kechedzhi, R. Collins, O. Naaman, S. Boixo, F. Arute,et al., Diabatic gates for frequency-tunable superconducting qubits, Physical review letters123, 210501 (2019)

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Sheldon, E

    S. Sheldon, E. Magesan, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Procedure for systematically tuning up cross-talk in the cross- resonance gate, Physical Review A93, 060302 (2016)

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    S. S. Hong, A. T. Papageorge, P. Sivarajah, G. Crossman, N. Di- dier, A. M. Polloreno, E. A. Sete, S. W. Turkowski, M. P. da Silva, and B. R. Johnson, Demonstration of a parametrically activated entangling gate protected from flux noise, Physical Review A101, 012302 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    X. Li, T. Cai, H. Yan, Z. Wang, X. Pan, Y . Ma, W. Cai, J. Han, Z. Hua, X. Han,et al., Tunable coupler for realizing a controlled-phase gate with dynamically decoupled regime in a superconducting circuit, Physical Review Applied14, 024070 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    Y . Xu, J. Chu, J. Yuan, J. Qiu, Y . Zhou, L. Zhang, X. Tan, Y . Yu, S. Liu, J. Li,et al., High-fidelity, high-scalability two-qubit gate scheme for superconducting qubits, Physical review letters125, 240503 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Y . Sung, L. Ding, J. Braum ¨uller, A. Veps¨al¨ainen, B. Kannan, M. Kjaergaard, A. Greene, G. O. Samach, C. McNally, D. Kim, et al., Realization of high-fidelity cz and zz-free iswap gates with a tunable coupler, Physical Review X11, 021058 (2021)

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Foxen, J

    B. Foxen, J. Mutus, E. Lucero, E. Jeffrey, D. Sank, R. Barends, K. Arya, B. Burkett, Y . Chen, Z. Chen,et al., High speed flux sampling for tunable superconducting qubits with an embedded cryogenic transducer, Superconductor Science and Technology 32, 015012 (2018)

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    Yan, Y .-R

    Z. Yan, Y .-R. Zhang, M. Gong, Y . Wu, Y . Zheng, S. Li, C. Wang, F. Liang, J. Lin, Y . Xu,et al., Strongly correlated quantum walks with a 12-qubit superconducting processor, Sci- ence364, 753 (2019)

    work page 2019

  30. [30]

    M. A. Rol, L. Ciorciaro, F. K. Malinowski, B. M. Tarasinski, R. E. Sagastizabal, C. C. Bultink, Y . Salathe, N. Haandbæk, J. Sedivy, and L. DiCarlo, Time-domain characterization and correction of on-chip distortion of control pulses in a quantum processor, Applied Physics Letters116(2020)

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    M. Rol, F. Battistel, F. Malinowski, C. Bultink, B. Tarasin- ski, R. V ollmer, N. Haider, N. Muthusubramanian, A. Bruno, B. Terhal,et al., Fast, high-fidelity conditional-phase gate ex- ploiting leakage interference in weakly anharmonic supercon- ducting qubits, Physical review letters123, 120502 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Negˆırneac, H

    V . Negˆırneac, H. Ali, N. Muthusubramanian, F. Battistel, R. Sagastizabal, M. Moreira, J. Marques, W. Vlothuizen, M. Beekman, C. Zachariadis,et al., High-fidelity controlled-z gate with maximal intermediate leakage operating at the speed limit in a superconducting quantum processor, Physical Review Letters126, 220502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  33. [33]

    Barends, J

    R. Barends, J. Kelly, A. Megrant, A. Veitia, D. Sank, E. Jeffrey, T. C. White, J. Mutus, A. G. Fowler, B. Campbell,et al., Super- conducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance, Nature508, 500 (2014)

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    Kelly, R

    J. Kelly, R. Barends, A. G. Fowler, A. Megrant, E. Jeffrey, T. C. White, D. Sank, J. Y . Mutus, B. Campbell, Y . Chen,et al., State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit, Nature519, 66 (2015)

    work page 2015

  35. [35]

    Above 99.9% Fidelity Single-Qubit Gates, Two-Qubit Gates, and Readout in a Single Superconducting Quantum Device

    F. Marxer, J. Mro˙zek, J. Andersson, L. Abdurakhimov, J. Adam, V . Bergholm, R. Beriwal, C. F. Chan, S. Dahl, S. R. Das, et al., Above 99.9% fidelity single-qubit gates, two-qubit gates, and readout in a single superconducting quantum device, arXiv 6 preprint arXiv:2508.16437 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Sivak, A

    V . Sivak, A. Eickbusch, H. Liu, B. Royer, I. Tsioutsios, and M. Devoret, Model-free quantum control with reinforcement learning, Physical Review X12, 011059 (2022)

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    L. Ding, M. Hays, Y . Sung, B. Kannan, J. An, A. Di Paolo, A. H. Karamlou, T. M. Hazard, K. Azar, D. K. Kim,et al., High- fidelity, frequency-flexible two-qubit fluxonium gates with a transmon coupler, Physical Review X13, 031035 (2023)

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    R. Li, K. Kubo, Y . Ho, Z. Yan, Y . Nakamura, and H. Goto, Realization of high-fidelity cz gate based on a double-transmon coupler, Physical Review X14, 041050 (2024)

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    D. M. Zajac, J. Stehlik, D. L. Underwood, T. Phung, J. Blair, S. Carnevale, D. Klaus, G. A. Keefe, A. Carniol, M. Kumph, M. Steffen, and O. E. Dial, Spectator errors in tunable coupling architectures (2021), arXiv:2108.11221 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Z. Ni, S. Li, L. Zhang, J. Chu, J. Niu, T. Yan, X. Deng, L. Hu, J. Li, Y . Zhong,et al., Scalable method for eliminating residual zz interaction between superconducting qubits, Physical review letters129, 040502 (2022). Supplementary Information: Fast High-Fidelity CZ Gates with Robustness to Short-Term Waveform Distortion Ze-An Zhao,1, 2 Hai-Feng Zhang,1...

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Off-diagonal nullification:U ij =0 fori̸=j

    work page

  42. [42]

    A matrix satisfying these conditions is diagonal

    Diagonal unitarity:|U ii|=1 for alli. A matrix satisfying these conditions is diagonal. After factoring out a physically irrelevant global phase, the evolution is de- scribed by onlyD−1 independent relative phases. Therefore, a cyclic evolution reduces the system’s DOFs toD−1. We can now count the constraints by calculating the reduction in DOFs: •General...

    work page

  43. [43]

    The probability of measuring the|11⟩state after repeating the CZ gaten CZ times is given by: P11(nCZ) =|⟨11|R(θ, α) nCZ|11⟩|2 =|cos(n CZθ)−isin(n CZθ)cosα| 2

    CPhase error amplification: CPhase error can be amplified via repeated CZ gate applications. The probability of measuring the|11⟩state after repeating the CZ gaten CZ times is given by: P11(nCZ) =|⟨11|R(θ, α) nCZ|11⟩|2 =|cos(n CZθ)−isin(n CZθ)cosα| 2. It is straightforward to show thatP 11(nCZ)≈1 forα≈0, indicating that leakage does not accumulate withn C...

    work page

  44. [44]

    Leakage amplification: By strategically modulating intergate delays at idle working points, we enhance leakage into the|20⟩state, which is sub- sequently detected using a two-state readout technique. This delay modulation at the idle working points controls the relative phase between|11⟩and|20⟩states, thereby coherently enhancing the leakage error through...

    work page 2021