Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Enhanced Atom-by-Atom Assembly of Defect-Free Two-Dimensional Mixed-Species Atomic Arrays

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper reports defect-free mixed-species atom arrays of 120 atoms, with 98.6% filling and 14% defect-free probability.

desk verdict A real 120-atom mixed-species assembly milestone, with a useful diagonal-move algorithm upgrade; send to review, but ask for species-assignment calibration and fix an arithmetic error. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.02248 v2 pith:6Q65ZXVF submitted 2025-01-04 quant-ph physics.atom-ph

Ming-Rui Wei , Kun-Peng Wang , Jia-Yi Hou , Yi Chen , Peng Xu , Jun Zhuang , Rui-Jun Guo , Min Liu
show 3 more authors
Jin Wang Xiao-Dong He Ming-Sheng Zhan
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords atomicarraysopticaltweezersmixed-speciesdefect-freeassemblyatomrearrangementheuristicheteronuclearalgorithm85Rb87Rb
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports a route to building two-dimensional arrays of two different atomic species with no empty or misplaced sites. Starting from a 20-by-20 optical-tweezer reservoir, the authors use a movable tweezer to sort 60 atoms of 85Rb and 60 atoms of 87Rb into checkerboard and zebra patterns, achieving a filling fraction of 98.6(1)% and a defect-free probability of 14(2)% after repeated rearrangement cycles. The advance that makes this possible is an upgraded sorting algorithm that lets the moving tweezer travel diagonally as well as along rows and columns, preventing atoms from blocking one another and allowing multiple repair cycles. If the result stands, it gives mixed-species atom arrays a path beyond the tens-of-atoms scale, where independent control and readout of two species could support quantum error correction and Rydberg-mediated many-body studies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the enhanced heuristic heteronuclear algorithm (HHA), a sorting routine that plans the near-fewest moves of a single movable optical tweezer to fill misplaced and empty sites in a dual-species array. Its key addition is diagonal movement: the movable tweezer can travel along eight azimuthal directions, instead of only along the rows and columns of the static array, by jointly modulating the rf signals driving two perpendicular acousto-optic deflectors. This lets atoms move past one another and eliminates logjams, and it makes repeated rearrangement cycles practical; the authors report that the required number of moves for a 120-atom target is reduced by about 50% relative to the original HHA in simulation.

What would settle it

Repeatedly image a stationary 120-atom mixed-species array under the same heteronuclear fluorescence sequence and count how often a site's assigned species changes between exposures; if the per-site misidentification rate is comparable to the reported 1.4% vacancy fraction, the filling fraction and defect-free probability are overestimated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that defect-free two-dimensional mixed-species atom arrays can be scaled from the previous 64-tweezer proof of principle to 120 atoms by combining three upgrades: a 400-site static tweezer array generated by a spatial light modulator, a low-phase-noise arbitrary waveform generator that improves atom transport fidelity, and an enhanced heuristic heteronuclear algorithm (HHA) that adds diagonal tweezer trajectories to the original row-and-column moves. With these changes the authors report assembling arrays of 60 85Rb and 60 87Rb atoms in checkerboard and zebra geometries, with filling fraction 98.6(1)% and defect-free probability 14(2)% averaged over rearrangement cycles four through ten, up from a single-cycle probability of 1.3% for the checkerboard pattern. They also report that the remaining limit is not atom loss during rearrangement but residual heating from the sequential fluorescence imaging needed to identify the two isotopes.

Load-bearing premise

The 98.6% filling fraction and 14% defect-free probability depend on the fluorescence imaging correctly identifying which isotope occupies every site, and the paper reports no calibration of that species-identification error rate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Defect-free mixed-species arrays of 120 atoms, 60 per species, can now be produced with a single apparatus, making dual-isotope platforms competitive with single-species arrays at the hundred-atom scale.
  • Because rearrangement loss is reported to be negligible, further progress hinges on reducing fluorescence-imaging heating, for example through gentler or species-selective readout.
  • The enhanced HHA's diagonal moves should transfer directly to other two-species combinations, since the algorithm is not specific to rubidium isotopes.
  • Multiple rearrangement cycles are now viable for mixed-species assembly, with defect-free probability saturating near 14% after four cycles rather than improving indefinitely.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural testable extension is to interleave mid-circuit readout or continuous reloading with the multi-cycle algorithm; if per-cycle atom loss is as low as the paper implies, the 14% defect-free probability could be compounded toward near-certain assembly.
  • The imaging-heating limit suggests that switching to a single-shot, species-resolving readout, such as isotope-selective shelving, could raise both the filling fraction and the defect-free probability beyond the reported values.
  • Diagonal moves may also reduce transport distances in single-species assembly, where the same logjam argument applies, potentially lowering the heating budget for very large arrays.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports substantial experimental upgrades to a mixed-isotope rubidium tweezer array: a 20x20 static array produced by an 830 nm laser and SLM, improved movable tweezers with lower phase-noise driving, and an enhanced heuristic heteronuclear algorithm (HHA) that adds diagonal moves and supports multiple rearrangement cycles. The central result is the creation of defect-free two-dimensional mixed-species arrays of 120 single atoms (60 87Rb and 60 85Rb) in checkerboard and zebra patterns, with a claimed filling fraction of 98.6(1)% and defect-free probability of 14(2)% obtained by averaging over rearrangement cycles 4 to 10. The authors attribute the remaining limitation to cross-talk heating during two-species fluorescence imaging.

Significance. If the headline numbers are correct, this is the largest defect-free mixed-species atom array demonstrated to date and a clear step toward two-species platforms for quantum error correction and Rydberg-mediated quantum simulation. The work has real strengths: the headline statistics come from 500 experimental repetitions and multiple rearrangement cycles; the result is a direct measurement rather than a derived quantity with fitted parameters; and the paper includes a comparison of the enhanced HHA with the earlier HCOA algorithm, supporting the claim that rearrangement losses are not the dominant bottleneck. The enhanced algorithm is described in enough detail to be a useful contribution on its own. However, the quantitative centrality of the species-assignment fidelity means the missing calibration is a load-bearing issue rather than a presentation detail.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Fig. 4] The central claims of 98.6(1)% filling fraction and 14(2)% defect-free probability depend on classifying each of 120 sites as 87Rb, 85Rb, or empty from successive fluorescence images. The paper reports no calibration of the species-assignment fidelity, no false-positive/false-negative analysis, and no error model for the classification. Because the defect-free probability is exponentially sensitive to per-site errors, a 0.3% per-site apparent success inflation would change the measured 14% by a factor (0.989/0.986)^120 ≈ 1.44, and a misidentification rate comparable to the 1.4% vacancy rate would qualitatively change the conclusion. The authors should report a confusion matrix for the species assignment, for example from sites with known occupation or from independently prepared single-species arrays, and propagate the resulting uncertainties into the headline numbers.
  2. [Section III, 'five orders of magnitude' sentence] The statement that the measured defect-free probability is 'approximately five orders of magnitude higher' than in the previous work is arithmetically inconsistent. The previous single-cycle probability was about 5%, and the present 14(2)% corresponds to a factor of roughly 3; even comparing the single-cycle 1.3% with the multi-cycle 14% gives a factor of about 10, not 10^5. This comparison should be corrected or removed.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 4(c) and averaging window] The text states that the defect-free probability increases rapidly, reaches a saturation point of 13.7%, and then exhibits fluctuations, yet the headline value 14(2)% is the average over cycles 4 to 10. The choice of this averaging window is not justified. The authors should either report the cycle-by-cycle values, state a prespecified selection criterion, or present the saturation value with its uncertainty instead of an average over an unexplained subset of the data.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section II] There are several typos and infelicities: 'revivor' should likely be 'reservoir', 'braodband' should be 'broadband', 'arbitratry' should be 'arbitrary', and 'Gerchber Saxton' should be 'Gerchberg-Saxton'.
  2. [Section III heading] The heading reads 'DEFECT-FREE HOMONUCLEAR ARRA Y ASSEMBL Y', but the section reports heteronuclear array assembly; this appears to be a typo and should be corrected.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 3(d)] The text says the enhanced HHA reduces the number of moves by 50% 'for making a defect-free 120-atom arrays', while Fig. 3(d) plots moves as a function of 'Size of Array' for N x N arrays. Please clarify whether the horizontal axis is the number of filled sites or the total array size, and state the simulation parameters used for the 120-atom comparison.
  4. [Section III, sub-array success rates] The sentence 'the success rate for defect-free 87Rb(85Rb) atom sub-array is 26% (37%)' introduces a quantity that is not defined in the text; please define how a sub-array success rate is computed and how it relates to the global defect-free probability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 120-atom mixed-species defect-free result is a direct measurement; algorithmic self-citations are present but not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, the creation of mixed-species defect-free arrays with 120 atoms at 98.6(1)% filling and 14(2)% defect-free probability, is a direct experimental measurement extracted from fluorescence images and defect-count histograms, not a quantity derived from fitted parameters or defined in terms of the paper's inputs. The enhanced HHA is described as an upgrade of the authors' own HHA from Ref. [39], and the comparison against HCOA from Ref. [62] is an experimental benchmark; neither self-citation supplies the headline filling fraction or defect-free probability. The inference that rearrangement losses are negligible is based on the measured equality of filling fractions for the two algorithms, which is testable from the reported data. No equation in the paper reduces a predicted output to a fitted input, and the defect-free probability is not a renamed fit parameter. The algorithmic lineage and HCOA comparison are normal self-citations and do not carry the central result. For completeness, two non-circular concerns are noted: the claim that the defect-free probability is 'approximately five orders of magnitude higher' than the previous 88.5%-filling result is arithmetically incorrect (14% versus about 5% is a factor of about 3), and the species-assignment imaging is not calibrated, but these are correctness and verification issues rather than circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters; all central numbers are measured. The main unstated inputs are the reliability of species-resolved imaging, the loss-free assumption for diagonal moves, and the Gaussian/binomial model used to extract filling fractions from defect histograms. The algorithm is described narratively, not formally specified.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math The number of defects in the assembled array follows a distribution that can be Gaussian-fitted to extract the filling fraction (Fig. 4c inset).
    The filling fraction and its error are obtained from fitting the histogram of defect counts; this assumes the defect count distribution is approximately binomial/Gaussian.
  • domain assumption Diagonal transport moves with spacing >7 um do not cause atom loss due to disturbances of the trap potential.
    Section III, first paragraph states this condition but provides no direct loss measurement for diagonal moves.
  • domain assumption Fluorescence imaging with sequential 85Rb and 87Rb probe light identifies each atom's species with negligible misidentification, and the observed cross-talk heating is the dominant loss mechanism.
    Section III, final paragraph; no calibration of imaging fidelity or loss attribution beyond the HHA/HCOA comparison.
  • domain assumption The 20x20 static tweezer array has sufficient uniformity (98%) and trap depth so that every site can hold an atom and the movable tweezer can access all sites.
    Section II states the uniformity and lifetime but does not report site-by-site trap characterization.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhanced Atom-by-Atom Assembly of Defect-Free Two-Dimensional Mixed-Species Atomic Arrays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6Q65ZXVF

@misc{pith2026250102248,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhanced Atom-by-Atom Assembly of Defect-Free Two-Dimensional Mixed-Species Atomic Arrays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6Q65ZXVF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.02248}
}
abstract

Defect-free single atom array in optical tweezers is a promising platform for scalable quantum computing, quantum simulation, and quantum metrology. Extending single-species array to mixed-species one promise to offer new possibilities. In our recent proof of principle realization of defect-free two-dimensional assembly of mixed-species $^{85}$Rb ($^{87}$Rb) atom arrays [C. Sheng et al.\href{https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.083202}{{\color{blue} Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 083202(2022)}}], the filling fractions were limited by the imperfect transfer of atoms and the occurrence of logjams during the atom rearrangement. In order to scale up the size of defect-free mixed-species atom array, we scale up the tweezer array and improve the atom transfer, and upgrade the heuristic heteronuclear algorithm so as to facilitate multiple rearrangement cycles. Consequently, we successfully create defect-free atom arrays with 120 mixed-species single atoms. The corresponding filling fraction and defect-free probability are improved to be 98.6(1)\% and 14(2)\%, respectively. It is anticipated that the enhanced algorithm can be extended to other combinations of atomic species, and this mixed-species atom array is readily for studies of many-body physics, quantum error correction, and quantum metrology.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.02248 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic diagram of upgraded experimental setup, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Schematic diagram of the heteronuclear array rear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Defect-free homonuclear array assembly and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The results of the defect-free dual-isotope atom array. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The respective dependence of measured filling frac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. atommovr: An open-source simulation framework for rearrangement in atomic arrays

    quant-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A simulation framework and benchmarking study that extracts roughly sqrt(N) lower-bound scaling for time-optimal atom rearrangement and introduces a dual-species algorithm that succeeds on the tested target patterns.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    H. Kim, W. Lee, H.-G. Lee, H. Jo, Y. Song, and J. Ahn, In situ single-atom array synthesis using dynamic holo- graphic optical tweezers, Nat. Commun. 7, 13317 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Barredo, S

    D. Barredo, S. L´ es´ eleuc, V. Lienhard, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, An atom-by-atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary two-dimensional atomic arrays, Science 354, 1021-1023 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Endres, H

    M. Endres, H. Bernien, A. Keesling, H. Levine, E. R. Anschuetz, A. Krajenbrink, C. Senko, V. Vuleti´ c, M. Greiner, and M. D. Lukin, Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays, Science 354, 1024-1027 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Barredo, V

    D. Barredo, V. Lienhard, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Synthetic three-dimensional atomic struc- tures assembled atom by atom, Nature (London) 561, 79-82 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Kumar, T

    A. Kumar, T. Wu, F. Giraldo, and D. S. Weiss, Sorting ultracold atoms in a three-dimensional optical lattice in a realization of Maxwell’s demon, Nature (London) 561, 83-87 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    M. A. Norcia, A. W. Young, and A. M. Kaufman, Mi- croscopic control and detection of ultracold strontium in 6 optical-tweezer arrays, Phys. Rev. X 8, 041054 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Cooper, J

    A. Cooper, J. P. Covey, I. S. Madjarov, S. G. Porsev, M. S. Safronova, and M. Endres, Alkaline-earth atoms in optical tweezers, Phys. Rev. X 8, 041055 (2018)

    2018

  8. [8]

    Jenkins, J

    A. Jenkins, J. W. Lis, A. Senoo, W. F. McGrew, and A. M. Kaufman, Ytterbium nuclear-spin qubits in an optical tweezer array, Phys. Rev. X 12, 021027 (2022)

    work page 2022

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    S. Ma, A. P. Burgers, G. Liu, J. Wilson, B. Zhang, and J. D. Thompson, Universal gate operations on nuclear spin qubits in an optical tweezer array of atoms, Phys. Rev. X 12, 021028 (2022)

    2022

  2. [10]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms. Nat. Phys. 16, 132-142 (2020)

    2020

  3. [11]

    X. Wu, X. Liang, Y. Tian, F. Yang, C. Chen, Y.-C. Liu, M. K. Tey, and L. You, A concise review of Rydberg atom based quantum computation and quantum simulation, Chin. Phys. B 30, 020305 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    M., Kaufman, K.-K

    A. M., Kaufman, K.-K. Ni, Quantum science with optical tweezer arrays of ultracold atoms and molecules. Nat. Phys. 17, 1324-1333 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Gonz´ alez-Cuadra, D

    D. Gonz´ alez-Cuadra, D. Bluvstein, M. Kalinowski, R. Kaubruegger, N. Maskara, P. Naldesi, T. V. Zache, A. M. Kaufman, M. D. Lukin, H. Pichler, B. Vermersch, Jun Ye and P. Zoller, Fermionic quantum processing with programmable neutral atom arrays, Proceedings of the National A...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Saffman, Quantum computing with neutral atoms, National Science Review, 6, 24-25 (2019)

    M. Saffman, Quantum computing with neutral atoms, National Science Review, 6, 24-25 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    Bluvstein, H

    D. Bluvstein, H. Levine, G.Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, M. Kalinowski, A. Keesling, N. Maskara, H. Pich- ler, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c and M. D. Lukin, A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays, Nature (London) 604, 451-456 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    T. M. Graham, Y. Song, J. Scott, C. Poole, L. Phutti- tarn, K. Jooya, P. Eichler, X. Jiang, A. Marra, B. Grinke- meyer, M. Kwon, M. Ebert, J. Cherek, M. T. Licht- man, M. Gillette, J. Gilbert, D. Bowman, T. Ballance, C. Campbell, E. D. Dahl, O. Crawford, N. S. Blunt, B. Rogers...

    2022

  9. [17]

    Bluvstein, S

    D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Y. Zhou, T. Manovitz, S. Ebadi, M. Cain, M. Kalinowski, D.Hangleiter, J. P. B. Ataides, N. Maskara, I. Cong, X. Gao, P. S. Rodriguez, T. Karolyshyn, G. Semeghini, M. J. Gullans, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin , Lo...

    2024

  10. [18]

    I. S. Madjarov, A. Cooper, A. L. Shaw, J. P. Covey, V. Schkolnik, T. H. Yoon, J. R. Williams, and M. Endres, An atomic-array optical clock with single-atom readout, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041052 (2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    J. P. Covey, I. S. Madjarov, A. Cooper, and M. En- dres, 2000-times repeated imaging of strontium atoms in clock-magic tweezer arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 173201 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    M. A. Norcia, A. W. Young, W. J. Eckner, E. Oelker, J. Ye, and A. M. Kaufman, Seconds-scale coherence on an optical clock transition in a tweezer array, Science 366, 93-97 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    A. W. Young, W. J. Eckner, W. R. Milner, D. Kedar, M. A. Norcia, E. Oelker, N. Schine, J. Ye and A. M. Kauf- man, Half-minute-scale atomic coherence and high rela- tive stability in a tweezer clock, Nature (London) 588, 408-413 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Xu, J.-H

    P. Xu, J.-H. Yang, M. Liu, X.-D. He, Y. Zeng, K.-P. Wang, J. Wang, D. J. Papoular, G. V. Shlyapnikov, and M.-S. Zhan, Interaction-induced decay of a heteronuclear two-atom system, Nat. Commun. 6, 7803 (2015)

    2015

  15. [23]

    L. A. Reynolds, E. Schwartz, U. Ebling, M. Weyland, J. Brand, and M. F. Andersen, Direct Measurements of Collisional Dynamics in Cold Atom Triads, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 073401 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Weyland, S

    M. Weyland, S. S. Szigeti, R. A. B. Hobbs, P. Ruk- sasakchai, L. Sanchez, and M. F. Andersen, Pair Corre- lations and Photoassociation Dynamics of Two Atoms in an Optical Tweezer, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 083401 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Zhuang, K.-P

    J. Zhuang, K.-P. Wang, P.-X. Wang, M.-R. Wei, B. Ma- mat, C. Sheng, P. Xu, M. Liu, and J. Wang et al. Prob- ing the interaction energy of two 85Rb atoms in an opti- cal tweezer via spin-motion coupling, Phys. Rev. A 109, 043320 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    L. R. Liu, J. D. Hood, Y. Yu, J. T. Zhang, N. R. Hutzler, T. Rosenband, K.-K. Ni, Building one molecule from a reservoir of two atoms. Science 360, 900-903 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    He, K.-P

    X.-D. He, K.-P. Wang, J. Zhuang, P. Xu, X. Gao, R.- J. Guo, C. Sheng, M. Liu, J. Wang, J.-M. Li, G. V. Shlyapnikov, and M.-S. Zhan, Coherently Forming a Sin- gle Molecule in an Optical Trap, Science 370, 331-335 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    D. K. Ruttley, A. Guttridge, S. Spence, R. C. Bird, C. R. L. Sueur, J. M. Hutson, and S. L. Cornish, Formation of ultracold molecules by merging optical tweezers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 223401 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Zhang, L

    J. Zhang, L. Picard, W. Cairncross, K. Wang, Y. Yu, F. Fang, K.-K. Ni, An optical tweezer array of ground- state polar molecules, Quantum Sci. Technol. 7, 035006 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    D. K. Ruttley, A. Guttridge, T. R. Hepworth, and S. L. Cornish, Enhanced Quantum Control of Individual Ultracold Molecules Using Optical Tweezer Arrays, PRX Quantum 5, 020333 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Picard, G

    L. Picard, G. Patenotte, A. Park, S. Gebretsadkan, and K.-K. Ni, Site-Selective Preparation and Multistate Readout of Molecules in Optical Tweezers, PRX Quan- tum 5, 020344 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    C. M. Holland, Y. Lu, and L. W. Cheuk, On-demand entanglement of molecules in a reconfigurable optical tweezer array, Science 382, 1143 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, L. Anderegg, E. Chae, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, Dipolar spin-exchange and entanglement between molecules in an optical tweezer ar- ray, Science 382, 1138 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    L. R. B. Picard, A. J. Park, G. E. Patenotte, S. Gebret- sadkan, D. Wellnitz, A. M. Rey, and K.-K. Ni, Entangle- ment and iSW AP gate between molecular qubits, Nature (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    D. K. Ruttley, T. R. Hepworth, A. Guttridge, and S. L. Cornish, Long-lived entanglement of molecules in magic- wavelength optical tweezers, arXiv 2408.1904 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    I. I. Beterov and M. Saffman, Rydberg blockade, F¨ orster resonances, and quantum state measurements with dif- ferent atomic species, Phys. Rev. A 92, 042710 (2015)

    2015

  29. [37]

    Y. Zeng, P. Xu, X.-D. He, Y.-Y. Liu, M. Liu, J. Wang, D. J. Papoular, G. V. Shlyapnikov, and M.-S. Zhan, En- tangling Two Individual Atoms of Different Isotopes Via Rydberg Blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 160502 (2017). 7

    2017

  30. [38]

    Guo, X.-D

    R.-J. Guo, X.-D. He, C. Sheng, J.-H. Yang, P. Xu, K.-P. Wang, J. -Q. Zhong, M. Liu, J. Wang, and M.-S. Zhan, Balanced Coherence Times of Atomic Qubits of Different Species in a Dual 3 ×3 Magic-Intensity Optical Dipole Trap Array, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 153201 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Sheng, J.-Y

    C. Sheng, J.-Y. Hou, X.-D. He, K.-P. Wang, R.-J. Guo, J. Zhuang, B. Mamat, P. Xu, M. Liu, J. Wang, and M.-S. Zhan, Defect-Free Arbitrary-Geometry Assembly of Mixed-Species Atom Arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 083202 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Singh, S

    K. Singh, S. Anand, A. Pocklington, J. T. Kemp, and H. Bernien, Dual-Element, Two-Dimensional Atom Ar- ray with Continuous-Mode Operation, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011040 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, and J. M. Sage, Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021314 (2019)

    2019

  34. [42]

    Saffman, Quantum computing with atomic qubits and Rydberg interactions: Progress and challenges

    M. Saffman, Quantum computing with atomic qubits and Rydberg interactions: Progress and challenges. J. Phys. B: Atomic, Mol. Opt. Phys. 49, 202001 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    Singh, C

    K. Singh, C. E. Bradley, S. Anand, V. Ramesh, R. White, and H. Bernien, Mid-circuit correction of cor- related phase errors using an array of spectator qubits, Science 380 , 1265 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Anand, C

    S. Anand, C. E. Bradley, R. White, V. Ramesh, K. Singh, and H. Bernien A, dual-species Rydberg array, Nat. Phys. 20, 1744-1750 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    A. M. Farouk, I. I. Beterov, P. Xu, S. Bergamini, and I. I. Ryabtsev, Parallel implementation of CNOT N and C 2NOT2 gates via homonuclear and heteronuclear F¨ orster interactions of Rydberg atoms, Photonics 10, 1280 (2023)

    2023

  38. [46]

    Sun, Buffer-atom-mediated quantum logic gates with off-resonant modulated driving

    Y. Sun, Buffer-atom-mediated quantum logic gates with off-resonant modulated driving. Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 67, 120311 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Z. Lan, W. Li, and I. Lesanovsky, Quantum melting of two-component Rydberg crystals, Phys. Rev. A bf 94, 051603(R) (2016)

    2016

  40. [48]

    Chepiga, Tunable quantum criticality in multicom- ponent Rydberg arrays, Phys

    N. Chepiga, Tunable quantum criticality in multicom- ponent Rydberg arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 076505 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    C. Li, S. Liu, H. Wang, W. Zhang, Z.-X. Li, H. Zhai, and Y. Gu, Uncovering Emergent Spacetime Supersym- metry with Rydberg Atom Arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 223401 (2024)

    2024

  42. [50]

    Liu, S.-Y

    L.-Y.-N. Liu, S.-Y. Yu, S.-R. Peng, J. Sheng, S. Yi, P. Xu, S.-Sh. Gong, T. Shi, J. Cui, Novel ground states and emergent quantum many-body scars in a two-species Rydberg atom array, arXiv:2408.15965

    arXiv

  43. [51]

    Ohl de Mello, D

    D. Ohl de Mello, D. Sch¨ affner, J. Werkmann, T. Preuschoff, L. Kohfahl, M. Schlosser, and G. Birkl, Defect-free assembly of 2D clusters of more than 100 single-atom quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 203601 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    Ebadi, T

    S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Se- meghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pich- ler, W. W. Ho, et al., Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature 595, 227 (2021)

    2021

  45. [53]

    Scholl, M

    P. Scholl, M. Schuler, H. J. Williams, A. A. Eberharter, D. Barredo, K.-N. Schymik, V. Lienhard, L.-P. Henry, T. C. Lang, T. Lahaye, et al., Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromagnets with hundreds of Rydberg atoms, Nature 595, 233 (2021)

    2021

  46. [54]

    W. Tian, W. J. Wee, A. Qu, B. J. M. Lim, P. R. Datla, V. P. W. Koh, and H. Loh, Parallel assembly of arbitrary defect-free atom arrays with a multitweezer algorithm, Phys. Rev. Appl. 19, 034048 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    Schlosser, S

    M. Schlosser, S. Tichelmann, D. Sch¨ affner, D. Ohl de Mello, M. Hambach, J. Sch¨ utz, and G. Birkl, Scalable Multilayer Architecture of Assembled Single-Atom Qubit Arrays in a Three-Dimensional Talbot Tweezer Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 180601 (2023)

    2023

  48. [56]

    Pause, L

    L. Pause, L. Sturm, M. Mittenb¨ uhler, S. Amann, T. Preuschoff, D. Sch¨ affner, M. Schlosser, and G. Birkl, Supercharged two-dimensional tweezer array with more than 1000 atomic qubits, Optica 11, 222-226 (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    M. A. Norcia, H. Kim, W. B. Cairncross, M. Stone, A. Ryou, M. Jaffe, M. O. Brown, K. Barnes, P. Battaglino, T. C. Bohdanowicz, et al., Iterative assembly of 171Yb atom arrays in cavity-enhanced optical lattices, PRX Quantum 5, 030316 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    Gyger, M

    F. Gyger, M. Ammenwerth, R. Tao, H. Timme, S. Sni- girev, I. Bloch, and J. Zeiher, Continuous operation of large-scale atom arrays in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033104 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    H. J. Manetsch, G. Nomura, E. Bataille, K. H. Leung, X. Lv, and M. Endres, A tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits, ArXiv:2403.12021

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    Pichard, D

    G. Pichard, D. Lim, ´E. Bloch, J. Vaneecloo, L. Boura- chot, G.-J. Both, G. M´ eriaux, S. Dutartre, and R. Hostein et al., Rearrangement of individual atoms in a 2000-site optical-tweezer array at cryogenic tempera- tures, Phys. Rev. Applied 22, 024073 (2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    Nakamura, T

    Y. Nakamura, T. Kusano, R. Yokoyama, K. Saito, K. Higashi, N. Ozawa, T.Takano, Y. Takasu, Y.Takahashi, Hybrid Atom Tweezer Array of Nuclear Spin and Optical Clock Qubits,Phys. Rev. X 14, 041062 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    Tao, L.-G

    Z.-J. Tao, L.-G. Yu, P. Xu, J.-Y. Hou, X.-D. He, and M.-S. Zhan, Efficient two-dimensional defect-free dual- species atom arrays rearrangement algorithm with near- fewest atom moves, Chin. Physics Lett. 39, 083701 924 (2022)

    2022

  55. [63]

    Schymik, V

    K.-N. Schymik, V. Lienhard, D. Barredo, P. Scholl, H. Williams, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Enhanced atom- by-atom assembly of arbitrary tweezer arrays, Phys. Rev. A 102, 063107 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Sheng, J.-Y

    C. Sheng, J.-Y. Hou, X.-D. He, P. Xu, K.-P. Wang, J. Zhuang, X. Li, M. Liu, J. Wang, and M.-S. Zhan, Ef- ficient preparation of two-dimensional defect-free atom arrays with near-fewest sorting-atom moves, Physical Re- view Research 3, 023008 (2021)

    2021

  57. [65]

    D. Kim, A. Keesling, A. Omran, H. Levine, H. Bernien, M. Greiner, M. D. Lukin, and D. R. Englund, Large- scale uniform optical focus array generation with a phase spatial light modulator, Optics letters 44(12), 3178–3181 (2019)

    2019

  58. [66]

    Bianchi and Roberto Di Leonardo, Real-time opti- cal micro-manipulation using optimized holograms gen- erated on the GPU, Computer Physics Communications 181(8), 1444–1448 (2010)

    S. Bianchi and Roberto Di Leonardo, Real-time opti- cal micro-manipulation using optimized holograms gen- erated on the GPU, Computer Physics Communications 181(8), 1444–1448 (2010)

    2010

  59. [67]

    Di Leonardo, F

    R. Di Leonardo, F. Ianni, and G. Ruocco, Computer gen- eration of optimal holograms for optical trap arrays, Op- tics Express 15(4), 1913–1922 (2007)

    2007

  60. [68]

    SR Samoylenko, A V Lisitsin, Danilo Schepanovich, IB Bobrov, SS Straupe, and SP Kulik, Single atom move- ment with dynamic holographic optical tweezers, Laser Physics Letters 17(2), 025203 (2020). 8

    2020

  61. [69]

    Z. Fu, P. Xu, Y. Sun, Y.-Y. Liu, X.-D. He, X. Li, M. Liu, R.-B. Li, J. Wang, L. Liu, and M.-S. Zhan, High-fidelity entanglement of neutral atoms via a Rydberg-mediated single-modulated-pulse controlled-phase gate, Phys. Rev. A 105, 042430 (2022)

    2022

  62. [70]

    Schymik, S

    K.-N. Schymik, S. Pancaldi, F. Nogrette, D. Barredo, J. Paris, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Single atoms with 6000-second trapping lifetimes in optical-tweezer arrays at cryogenic temperatures, Phys. Rev. Appl. 16, 034013 (2021)

    2021

  63. [71]

    M. O. Brown, T. Thiele, C. Kiehl, T.-W. Hsu, and C. A. Regal, Gray-molasses optical-tweezer loading: Con- trolling collisions for scaling atom-array assembly, Phys. Rev. X 9, 011057 (2019)

    2019

  64. [72]

    S. Wang, W. Zhang, T. Zhang, S. Mei, Y. Wang, J. Hu, W. Chen. Accelerating the assembly of defect-free atomic arrays with maximum parallelisms. Phys. Rev. Appl.,19, 054032(2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.