REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 58 references
Leakage at zero temperature from changes in chemical potential in Majorana qubits
T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read The paper shows that at zero temperature, small chemical-potential variations make Majorana tetron errors grow linearly with wire length, overturning the exponential suppression predicted for long topological wires.
desk verdict Solid, well-executed study of a real effect—zero-temperature leakage under chemical-potential ramps grows linearly with wire length—but the leap from Leven to Pauli error rates rests on an unvalidated diffusion model and should be framed as an estimate, not a proven error scaling. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The model is the Kitaev tetron: two uncoupled Kitaev chains with identical time-dependent chemical potential, whose four end Majorana zero modes encode the qubit. The paper tracks two leakage quantities, $L_{\mathrm{even}}$ and $L_{\mathrm{odd}}$, defined through the MZM-parity operator $\hat{P}_t$, and computes them numerically with the covariance-matrix method for fermionic Gaussian states. The analytic engine is the half Landau-Zener effect from adiabatic perturbation theory, which yields $v^2$ scaling and dynamic-phase oscillations in the near-adiabatic regime, plus overlap formulas for MZM and bulk quasiparticle wavefunctions in the sudden regime. The load-bearing identity is that bulk pair-production amplitude is extensive in $N$ while single-MZM emission is not, which is what makes $L_{\mathrm{even}}$ linear and $L_{\mathrm{odd}}$ constant.
What would settle it
Measure the Pauli error probability per chemical-potential ramp as a function of chain length $N$ in a tetron device, or in a numerically exact model with quasiparticle recombination; if the error probability per ramp does not grow roughly linearly with $N$, or if recombination removes most pairs before they reach the ends, the claimed length-linear error scaling fails.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The central claim is that after a linear chemical-potential ramp, the leakage into even-quasiparticle states, $L_{\mathrm{even}}$, grows linearly with the chain length $N$, while the leakage into odd-quasiparticle states, $L_{\mathrm{odd}}$, remains constant in $N$, throughout the topological phase at zero temperature. In the sudden limit $L_{\mathrm{even}} \approx (N-2)\mu_{\mathrm{fin}}^2/8$, and in the near-adiabatic limit $L_{\mathrm{even}} \approx N v^2/8$ for $w=\Delta=1/2$, with $L_{\mathrm{odd}}$ approximated by products of Majorana-wavefunction overlaps before and after the quench. Because pairs of bulk quasiparticles are mobile and slowly recombine, the paper estimates that a fixed fraction, one third, of these pairs are absorbed by Majorana modes at opposite ends, producing Pauli errors; hence the Pauli error rate is predicted to increase with wire length.
Load-bearing premise
The chain from leakage to real errors assumes quasiparticles move diffusively and independently and are absorbed by Majorana modes faster than they recombine, giving a fixed one-third probability that an even-parity pair becomes a Pauli error, an estimate the paper does not derive from the Kitaev model.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- For tetrons longer than the MZM localization length, any chemical-potential ramp leaves an even-parity leakage that grows linearly with $N$, so error rates from this source are not topologically suppressed.
- If the one-third conversion estimate holds, Pauli error rates after a ramp increase with tetron length, overturning the exponential coherence-time growth predicted for long wires.
- Leakage into odd-quasiparticle states stays constant in $N$ and contributes errors that decrease with inverse wire length, so long wires mainly suffer from the even-quasiparticle channel.
- Near-adiabatic and sudden limits give explicit scaling laws: $L_{\mathrm{even}} \propto N v^2$ at low ramp rates and $L_{\mathrm{even}} \approx N\mu_{\mathrm{fin}}^2/8$ for an instantaneous quench, with sinusoidal oscillations in $v$ set by the dynamic phase.
Reading between the lines
- Beyond the paper's stated scope, the same bulk pair-creation mechanism should appear in any Kitaev-chain-like realization, such as quantum-dot arrays or cold-atom wires, so length-linear leakage is probably a generic feature rather than an artifact of semiconductor nanowires.
- One testable extension is pulse shaping: the half Landau-Zener description suggests that a chemical-potential ramp slowed near the gap minimum could suppress pair excitation below the linear-ramp prediction.
- If quasiparticle recombination can be engineered to outpace Majorana absorption, the Pauli-error conversion fraction would drop below one third, decoupling $L_{\mathrm{even}}$ from the actual error rate; the paper's one-third number is an estimate, not a theorem.
- There may be an optimal tetron length that balances exponential overlap suppression at short lengths against linear leakage growth at long lengths, since the two error sources scale oppositely with $N$.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper studies a Kitaev-chain model of a Majorana tetron qubit subjected to a global linear ramp of the chemical potential at zero temperature. Using exact covariance-matrix numerics and two analytic approximations, it reports that even-parity quasiparticle leakage Leven grows linearly with the number of sites N in each chain, while odd-parity leakage Lodd remains constant in N, for ramps that stay deep in the topological phase. The near-adiabatic behavior is attributed to half Landau-Zener transitions and the sudden behavior to wavefunction overlaps, with closed-form expressions in Eqs. (C22) and (D15). The authors then argue that the even-parity leakage can be converted into Pauli errors once bulk quasiparticles are absorbed by Majorana modes at opposite ends of the wire, leading to an error rate that grows with tetron length.
Significance. The central numerical result, linear-in-N even-parity leakage induced by a chemical-potential ramp, is a concrete and falsifiable prediction about a previously underappreciated error source in Majorana-based tetrons. The paper's strengths include exact Gaussian-state simulation, two independent analytical approximations with no fitted constants that match numerics in their respective regimes, and explicit scaling formulas that can be tested in larger simulations or experiments. If the link from leakage to Pauli errors were quantitatively established, the work would substantially revise the expectation that topological protection suppresses length-dependent error rates. As it stands, however, the error-rate claim rests on an auxiliary phenomenological conversion step that is not derived from the Kitaev model.
major comments (3)
- The abstract and conclusion claim that chemical-potential variations produce 'errors' that 'grow linearly with tetron length,' but the quantity actually computed is even-parity leakage Leven within a closed quadratic Hamiltonian. The conversion of Leven into a Pauli-error rate is not derived from the Kitaev model: Appendix E assumes QPs are generated at a single site, move diffusively and independently, are absorbed immediately at the chain ends, and do not recombine, yielding the 1/3 probability in Eq. (E3). Appendix A5 explicitly states that the analysis 'does not take into account the thermal processes that allow absorption of bulk quasiparticles by MZMs.' Since the simulated dynamics is unitary and the final state is an eigenstate of H(T), there is no mechanism in the model that sends the even-parity bulk QPs to the Majorana modes. If recombination or non-absorbing escape has a rate that competes with the N-dependent diffusion time, the conversion probability can depend on N, and Leven~N would not imply an error rate ~N. Please either supply a quantitative conversion model with absorption/recombination rates or reframe the central claim as a statement about even-parity leakage, with the Pauli-error consequence presented as a conjecture under stated assumptions.
- The conclusion that these scaling laws hold 'throughout the topological phase' is contradicted by the paper's own results. In Fig. 4, for a final chemical potential mu_fin=0.5 (still within |mu|<2|w|), Leven saturates and the linear-in-N behavior is lost; Appendix C likewise notes that Eq. (C6) and the constant scaling of Lodd hold for mu_fin << 2|w| and that Leven is linear only in the low-leakage limit Leven << 1. The analytic expressions (C22) and (D15) are derived for small changes in chemical potential. The proven statements should therefore be restricted to the deep-topological-phase, low-leakage regime, and the 'throughout the topological phase' wording withdrawn.
- The statement that the linear-in-N scaling of Leven and constant scaling of Lodd hold 'irrespective of the ramp rate and the amplitude of change in the chemical potential' is too broad. The data show the linear behavior only for deep-topological-phase parameters where Leven remains small; at larger mu_fin (Fig. 4) leakage saturates and can approach unity, and the v-dependence itself differs between the near-adiabatic regime (Leven ~ v^2 in Eq. D15) and the sudden regime (v-independent Leven(infinity) in Eq. C22). Please clarify that the stated universality applies only in the low-leakage, deep-phase regime.
minor comments (4)
- The displayed equation after the substitution N -> N-2 reads (N-2)/(2 pi) * pi mu_fin^2/4 = N mu_fin^2/8, but the left-hand side equals (N-2) mu_fin^2/8, not N mu_fin^2/8. Please correct the algebra or the displayed equality.
- The caption says 'Panels (b, e) and (c, d) respectively show Lodd and Leven,' but the figure layout indicates the correct pairings are (b, e) and (c, f). Please fix this reference.
- The phrase 'This behavior holds for all values of the ramp rate v and final chemical potential mu_fin ~ mu_in' is confusing because mu_in is fixed at 0 in the numerics while mu_fin is varied; the intended statement is presumably 'for mu_fin deep in the topological phase.' Please rephrase.
- The acknowledgement that the instantaneous computational basis is 'potentially optimistic' is important enough to be stated in the main text, since the numerical values of Leven and Lodd depend on this basis choice, especially in the near-adiabatic regime.
Circularity Check
No circularity found: the linear-in-length leakage is computed from the Kitaev model by exact numerics and parameter-free analytics, with no fitted quantity renamed as a prediction.
full rationale
The paper's central claim is that even-parity quasiparticle leakage after a chemical-potential ramp grows linearly with chain length, while odd-parity leakage stays constant. This is not built into the definitions: Leven and Lodd are defined by projectors onto quasiparticle-parity sectors (Eqs. 6-9), and the scaling is extracted from unitary time evolution of the quadratic Kitaev tetron Hamiltonian using the covariance-matrix method (Appendix B). The analytic results in the sudden and near-adiabatic regimes (Eqs. C22 and D15) are derived from the same Hamiltonian with explicit perturbative approximations and contain no constants fitted to the numerical leakage data. The paper's numerics and analytics agree but are not made to agree by construction; for example, the sudden-limit formula Leven ~ N µ_fin^2/8 and the near-adiabatic formula Leven ~ N v^2/8 follow from the BdG spectrum and first-order adiabatic perturbation theory, not from fitting the inset of Fig. 2. The only fitted functions are illustrative oscillation fits in Fig. 6, which are clearly labeled as fits and are not used to establish the N-scaling. The conversion from bulk quasiparticle pairs to Pauli errors via the 1/3 random-walk estimate (Appendix E) is an acknowledged modeling assumption rather than a fitted input; it weakens the physical inference from leakage to errors but does not make the derivation circular. The paper also cites the authors' prior work [26] for exponential localization of Wannier quasiparticles; that is a supporting lemma with stated assumptions, not a uniqueness theorem forbidding alternatives, and it is not the sole evidence for the central scaling, which is also demonstrated numerically. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by definition or by fitted parameterization.
Assumptions & free parameters
assumptions (7)
- domain assumption The tetron qubit is described by two uncoupled Kitaev chains with identical parameters (Eq. 3).
- standard math The initial state is a fermionic Gaussian state and the Hamiltonian is quadratic, so the covariance matrix method is exact (Appendix B).
- domain assumption The chemical potential ramp stays deep in the topological phase, mu_fin <= 2|w|/10, so the bulk gap remains open (Eq. A15).
- domain assumption Wannier quasiparticles are exponentially localized around lattice sites (Appendix A.4, citing Ref. [26]).
- standard math Adiabatic perturbation theory for a two-level system (Eq. D1, from Ref. [32]) governs the low-ramp-rate leakage, with total leakage as a sum over levels.
- domain assumption Quasiparticles are mobile, recombine slowly, and are absorbed by Majorana modes much faster than they relax (Discussion, citing Refs. [25,26]).
- domain assumption Quasiparticle pairs generated in the bulk move diffusively and independently, so 1/3 of pairs reach opposite ends (Appendix E).
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Leakage at zero temperature from changes in chemical potential in Majorana qubits." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AQWSNOVG
@misc{pith2026250417485,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Leakage at zero temperature from changes in chemical potential in Majorana qubits},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AQWSNOVG}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.17485}
}
read the original abstract
Building a fault-tolerant quantum computer requires physical qubits with exceptionally low error rates. Majorana-based tetron qubits are predicted to exhibit error rates that decrease exponentially with inverse temperature and length of each topological superconducting wire in the tetron. In contrast to this prediction, we show that errors arising from small variations in the chemical potential grow linearly with tetron length at zero temperature. These errors stem from leakage into excited quasiparticle states, which ultimately poison Majorana modes at opposite ends of the tetron, causing errors. We further demonstrate that the dynamics of this leakage is captured by the half Landau-Zener effect, which dictates its dependence on key system parameters such as the superconducting gap, chemical potential variations, and dynamic changes in the spatial profile of Majorana modes. These results motivate further investigations into the impact of leakage on qubit performance and potential mitigation strategies.
Figures
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[19]
M. E. Beverland, P. Murali, M. Troyer, K. M. Svore, T. Hoefler, V. Kliuchnikov, G. H. Low, M. Soeken, A. Sundaram, and A. Vaschillo, Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage, arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.07629 (2022)
arXiv 2022
-
[1]
The Bogoliubov-de Gennes Formalism for the Tetron Qubit In the main text, we model the tetron qubit [18] using two uncoupled Kitaev Hamiltonians [8]. The Kitaev chain ˆH(λ) KC(t), with a time-dependent chemical potential, defined on an one-dimensional (1D) lattice, with N sites is ˆH(λ) KC(t) = −µ(t) NX j=1 ˆc(λ)† j ˆc(λ) j − 1 2 + N−1X j=1 −wˆc(λ)† j ˆc(...
-
[2]
0” subspace as satisfying ⟨ ˆZ⟩ = +1, ⟨ ˆPt⟩ = +1 and a qubit “1
Encoding a Qubit in the Four Majorana Zero Modes of the Tetron As discussed in the main text, the Kitaev chain exhibits a topological phase for |µ| < 2|w| and ∆̸= 0, which is characterized by the support of a near-zero energy fermionic mode ˆd(λ) 0,t with energy ε(λ) 0,t ≈ 0. The wavefunction of this fermionic mode is delocalized with weight exponentially...
-
[3]
Further Kitaev Chain Details Here we detail the dependence of the band-gap in the Kitaev chain on the chemical potential µ and the analytical form of the bulk quasiparticles above the band-gap. In this subsection we only treat a single time-independent Kitaev chain and so we drop the t-dependence and λ index for brevity. The bulk spectrum of the Kitaev ch...
-
[4]
Consider a single Kitaev chain in the topological regime described by the Hamiltonian ˆHKC
The Wannier Quasiparticles In this section, we recall the definition and some properties of Wannier quasiparticles (QPs) that we later use for proving some results on leakage. Consider a single Kitaev chain in the topological regime described by the Hamiltonian ˆHKC. Let{ ˆdk, ˆd† k} fork = 0,...,N − 1 denote the QP annhiliation and creation operators, wi...
-
[5]
Definition of Leven and Lodd Let|Ψ(0)⟩ be the initial state of the tetron. We assume that the tetron is initialized in a ground state with total even MZM-parity, i.e., ˆH(0)|Ψ(0)⟩ =E0,t=0|Ψ(0)⟩ +O(e−N/ξ) (A19) 10 and ˆP0|Ψ(0)⟩ =|Ψ(0)⟩, (A20) where Eq. (A19) includes an energy splitting that is exponentially small in the ratio of the Kitaev chain length (N...
-
[6]
annihilation operators corresponding to the bulk (above-gap) quasiparticles
Each ˆηj is a linear combination of { ˆdk} for k = 1,...,N − 1, i.e. annihilation operators corresponding to the bulk (above-gap) quasiparticles. Consequently, each ˆη† j is a linear combination of { ˆd† k} for k = 1,...,N − 1
-
[7]
The operators {ˆηj, ˆη† j} satisfy canonical anticommutation rules
Show all 58 references
-
[8]
Equivalently, N−1X j=1 ˆη† j ˆηj = N−1X k=1 ˆd† k ˆdk
The operators {ˆηj} span the space span{ ˆdk}. Equivalently, N−1X j=1 ˆη† j ˆηj = N−1X k=1 ˆd† k ˆdk. (A16)
-
[9]
Each operator ˆηj is localized around site j of the chain. In Ref. [26], it was shown that ˆηj can be chosen to be exponentially localized around a position xj, which typically lies between sitesj andj +1 for clean systems. This is a general result that relies only on the pres...
-
[10]
Y. Oreg, G. Refael, and F. Von Oppen, Helical liquids and Majorana bound states in quantum wires, Phys Rev Lett 105, 177002 (2010)
2010
-
[11]
We collect all rescaled Majorana operators in a single vector ˆ r= ˆr(1) 1 , ˆr(1) 2 ,..., ˆr(1) 2N, ˆr(2) 1 , ˆr(2) 2 ,..., ˆr(2) 2N T = Ωˆ c
The rescaled Majorana operators defined at each lattice site are, ˆr(λ) i = ˆc(λ) i + ˆc(λ)† i√ 2 , ˆr(λ) i+N = ˆc(λ) i − ˆc(λ)† i i √ 2 , (B11) wherei∈{ 1, 2,...,N} and these rescaled Majorana operators satisfy the rescaled Majorana anticommutation relation {ˆri, ˆrj} =δi,j. ...
-
[12]
deep in the topological phase
Scaling of leakage with system size, in the sudden quench limit Scaling of Lodd: We first derive an approximate formula for leakage into the odd-MZM-parity sector Lodd in the sudden quench limit. As the time-dependent Hamiltonian conserves total parity, the leakage states with...
-
[13]
Scaling of leakage with respect to ramp rate, in the sudden regime As stated in the main text, in our numerical study of the Kiteav-tetron qubit, we find that in the sudden regime, Leven and Lodd scale in v according to, Lodd(v) =Lodd(∞)− kodd v2 , Leven(v) =Leven(∞)− keven v2...
-
[14]
Bravyi, O
S. Bravyi, O. Dial, J. M. Gambetta, D. Gil, and Z. Nazario, The future of quantum computing with su- perconducting qubits, Journal of Applied Physics 132 (2022)
2022
-
[15]
Burkard, T
G. Burkard, T. D. Ladd, A. Pan, J. M. Nichol, and J. R. Petta, Semiconductor spin qubits, Reviews of Modern Physics 95, 025003 (2023)
2023
-
[16]
J. Wang, F. Sciarrino, A. Laing, and M. G. Thompson, Integrated photonic quantum technologies, Nature Pho- tonics 14, 273 (2020)
2020
-
[17]
C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, and J. M. Sage, Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges, Applied Physics Reviews 6, 10.1063/1.5088164 (2019)
2019 doi
-
[18]
Wintersperger, F
K. Wintersperger, F. Dommert, T. Ehmer, A. Hour- sanov, J. Klepsch, W. Mauerer, G. Reuber, T. Strohm, M. Yin, and S. Luber, Neutral atom quantum computing hardware: performance and end-user perspective, EPJ Quantum Technology 10, 32 (2023)
2023
-
[20]
Nayak, S
C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, Non-Abelian anyons and topological quan- tum computation, Reviews of Modern Physics 80, 1083 (2008)
2008
-
[21]
A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Physics Uspekhi 44, 131 (2001)
2001
-
[22]
R. M. Lutchyn, J. D. Sau, and S. Das Sarma, Ma- jorana fermions and a topological phase transition in semiconductor-superconductor heterostructures, Phys Rev Lett 105, 077001 (2010)
2010
-
[23]
R. M. Lutchyn, L. I. Glazman, and A. I. Larkin, Kinetics of the superconducting charge qubit in the presence of a quasiparticle, Physical Review B 74, 064515 (2006)
2006
-
[24]
Aghaee, A
M. Aghaee, A. Akkala, Z. Alam, R. Ali, A. A. Ramirez, M. Andrzejczuk, A. E. Antipov, P. Aseev, M. Astafev, and B. Bauer, InAs-Al hybrid devices passing the topo- logical gap protocol, Physical Review B 107, 245423 (2023)
2023
-
[25]
We estimate this probability by assum- ing the QPs in a pair are generated at the same lattice site and then follow independent random walks [38] un- til each reaches a chain end
and independently, then the probability of an error resulting from the excitation of a QP pair is given by the probability that they are absorbed by MZMs on opposite sides of the wire. We estimate this probability by assum- ing the QPs in a pair are generated at the same latti...
-
[26]
Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of Majorana fermions in solid state systems, Reports on Progress in Physics 75, 076501 (2012)
J. Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of Majorana fermions in solid state systems, Reports on Progress in Physics 75, 076501 (2012)
2012
-
[27]
Das Sarma, M
S. Das Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation, npj quantum information 1, 15001 (2015)
2015
-
[28]
Mourik, K
V. Mourik, K. Zuo, S. M. Frolov, S. Plissard, E. P. Bakkers, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Signatures of Majo- rana fermions in hybrid superconductor-semiconductor nanowire devices, Science 336, 1003 (2012)
2012
-
[29]
S. M. Albrecht, A. P. Higginbotham, M. Madsen, F. Kuemmeth, T. S. Jespersen, J. Nyg˚ ard, P. Krogstrup, and C. Marcus, Exponential protection of zero modes in Majorana islands, Nature 531, 206 (2016)
2016
-
[30]
Aghaee, A
M. Aghaee, A. Alcaraz Ramirez, Z. Alam, R. Ali, M. Andrzejczuk, A. Antipov, M. Astafev, A. Barze- gar, B. Bauer, J. Becker, U. K. Bhaskar, A. Bocharov, S. Boddapati, D. Bohn, J. Bommer, L. Bourdet, A. Bous- quet, S. Boutin, L. Casparis, B. J. Chapman, S. Cha- toor, A. W. Chris...
2025
-
[31]
Aasen, M
D. Aasen, M. Aghaee, Z. Alam, M. Andrzejczuk, A. An- tipov, M. Astafev, L. Avilovas, A. Barzegar, B. Bauer, and J. Becker, Roadmap to fault tolerant quantum com- putation using topological qubit arrays, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.12252 (2025)
2025 arXiv
-
[32]
Karzig, C
T. Karzig, C. Knapp, R. M. Lutchyn, P. Bonder- son, M. B. Hastings, C. Nayak, J. Alicea, K. Flens- berg, S. Plugge, Y. Oreg, C. M. Marcus, and M. H. Freedman, Scalable designs for quasiparticle-poisoning- protected topological quantum computation with Majo- rana zero modes, Ph...
2017
-
[33]
R. V. Mishmash, B. Bauer, F. von Oppen, and J. Al- icea, Dephasing and leakage dynamics of noisy Majorana- based qubits: Topological versus andreev, Physical Re- view B 101, 075404 (2020)
2020
-
[34]
Plugge, A
S. Plugge, A. Rasmussen, R. Egger, and K. Flensberg, Majorana box qubits, New Journal of Physics 19, 012001 (2017)
2017
-
[35]
Knapp, T
C. Knapp, T. Karzig, R. M. Lutchyn, and C. Nayak, Dephasing of Majorana-based qubits, Physical Review B 97, 125404 (2018)
2018
-
[36]
Aumentado, M
J. Aumentado, M. W. Keller, J. M. Martinis, and M. H. Devoret, Nonequilibrium Quasiparticles and 2 e Period- icity in Single-Cooper-Pair Transistors, Physical Review Letters 92, 066802 (2004)
2004
-
[37]
J. M. Martinis, M. Ansmann, and J. Aumentado, Energy Decay in Superconducting Josephson-Junction Qubits from Nonequilibrium Quasiparticle Excitations, Physical Review Letters 103, 097002 (2009)
2009
-
[38]
Karzig, W
T. Karzig, W. S. Cole, and D. I. Pikulin, Quasiparticle poisoning of Majorana qubits, Physical Review Letters 126, 057702 (2021)
2021
-
[39]
Alase, K
A. Alase, K. D. Stubbs, B. C. Sanders, and D. L. Feder, Erasure conversion in Majorana qubits via local quasi- particle detection, Physical Review Research 6, 043294 (2024)
2024
-
[40]
Rainis and D
D. Rainis and D. Loss, Majorana qubit decoherence by quasiparticle poisoning, Physical Review B 85, 174533 (2012)
2012
-
[41]
Goldstein and C
G. Goldstein and C. Chamon, Decay rates for topologi- cal memories encoded with Majorana fermions, Physical Review B 84, 205109 (2011)
2011
-
[42]
J. C. Budich, S. Walter, and B. Trauzettel, Failure of protection of Majorana based qubits against decoherence, Physical Review B 85, 121405 (2012)
2012
-
[43]
B. P. Truong, K. Agarwal, and T. Pereg-Barnea, Op- timizing the transport of Majorana zero modes in one- dimensional topological superconductors, Physical Re- view B 107, 104516 (2023)
2023
-
[44]
Cheng, V
M. Cheng, V. Galitski, and S. Das Sarma, Nonadiabatic effects in the braiding of non-Abelian anyons in topo- logical superconductors, Physical Review B 84, 104529 (2011)
2011
-
[45]
De Grandi and A
C. De Grandi and A. Polkovnikov, Adiabatic Perturba- tion Theory: From Landau–Zener Problem to Quenching Through a Quantum Critical Point, inQuantum Quench- ing, Annealing and Computation , edited by A. K. Chan- dra, A. Das, and B. K. Chakrabarti (Springer Berlin Hei- delberg,...
2010
-
[46]
Bauer, T
B. Bauer, T. Karzig, R. Mishmash, A. Antipov, and J. Alicea, Dynamics of Majorana-based qubits operated with an array of tunable gates, SciPost Physics 5, 004 (2018)
2018
-
[47]
Karzig, A
T. Karzig, A. Rahmani, F. von Oppen, and G. Refael, Optimal control of Majorana zero modes, Physical Re- view B 91, 201404 (2015)
2015
-
[48]
Bravyi and R
S. Bravyi and R. K¨ onig, Disorder-Assisted Error Correc- tion in Majorana Chains, Communications in Mathemat- ical Physics 316, 641 (2012)
2012
-
[49]
Mascot, T
E. Mascot, T. Hodge, D. Crawford, J. Bedow, D. K. Morr, and S. Rachel, Many-Body Majorana Braiding without an Exponential Hilbert Space, Physical Review Letters 131, 176601 (2023)
2023
-
[50]
Surace and L
J. Surace and L. Tagliacozzo, Fermionic Gaussian states: an introduction to numerical approaches, SciPost Physics Lecture Notes , 054 (2022)
2022
-
[51]
P. G. Doyle and J. L. Snell, Random walks and electric networks, Vol. 22 (American Mathematical Soc., 1984)
1984
-
[52]
Knapp, M
C. Knapp, M. Beverland, D. I. Pikulin, and T. Karzig, Modeling noise and error correction for Majorana-based quantum computing, Quantum 2, 88 (2018)
2018
-
[53]
T. Dvir, G. Wang, N. van Loo, C.-X. Liu, G. P. Mazur, A. Bordin, S. L. D. ten Haaf, J.-Y. Wang, D. van Driel, F. Zatelli, X. Li, F. K. Malinowski, S. Gazibegovic, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, M. Wimmer, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Realization of a minimal Kitaev chain in coupled...
2023
-
[54]
Leijnse and K
M. Leijnse and K. Flensberg, Parity qubits and poor man’s Majorana bound states in double quantum dots, Physical Review B 86, 134528 (2012)
2012
-
[55]
Tsintzis, R
A. Tsintzis, R. S. Souto, K. Flensberg, J. Danon, and M. Leijnse, Majorana Qubits and Non-Abelian Physics in Quantum Dot–Based Minimal Kitaev Chains, PRX Quantum 5, 010323 (2024)
2024
-
[56]
Jiang, T
L. Jiang, T. Kitagawa, J. Alicea, A. R. Akhmerov, D. Pekker, G. Refael, J. I. Cirac, E. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and P. Zoller, Majorana Fermions in Equilibrium and in Driven Cold-Atom Quantum Wires, Physical Review Letters 106, 220402 (2011)
2011
-
[57]
M. A. Nielsen, The Fermionic canonical commutation relations and the Jordan-Wigner transform, School of Physical Sciences The University of Queensland 59, 75 (2005)
2005
-
[58]
Mayer, M
W. Mayer, M. C. Dartiailh, J. Yuan, K. S. Wickramas- inghe, E. Rossi, and J. Shabani, Gate controlled anoma- lous phase shift in Al/InAs Josephson junctions, Nature Communications 11, 212 (2020)
2020
Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.