pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.11385 · v2 · pith:KGWWPKQDnew · submitted 2025-06-13 · 🪐 quant-ph

High-speed and high-connectivity two-qubit gates in long chains of trapped ions

Isabelle Savill-Brown , Joseph J. Hope , Alexander K. Ratcliffe , Varun D. Vaidya , Haonan Liu , Simon A. Haine , C. Ricardo Viteri , Zain Mehdi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 00:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords trapped ionsentangling gatesphonon-mediated entanglementall-to-all connectivityimpulsive excitationnon-local operationsquantum computingscalable processors
0
0 comments X

The pith

Impulsive spin-dependent excitation creates fast high-fidelity entanglement between any pair of ions in chains of up to 40.

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

The paper shows that broadband laser pulses can impulsively excite spin-dependent motion to produce non-local entanglement in long trapped-ion chains. This works through a phonon-mediated regime that completes the gate in roughly 1.3 to 2 center-of-mass oscillation periods for any chosen pair. A reader would care because the method keeps high fidelity while scaling to 40 ions and avoids the need for ion movement or distance-dependent slowing. The work also finds that the laser pulse precision needed stays only weakly dependent on chain length or ion separation. If the approach holds, it supplies a direct route to all-to-all connectivity in near-term ion-trap processors.

Core claim

Impulsive spin-dependent excitation can be used to perform high-fidelity non-local entangling operations in quasi-uniform chains of up to 40 ions by identifying a regime of phonon-mediated entanglement between arbitrary pairs of ions in the chain, where any two ions can be entangled in approximately 1.3-2 centre-of-mass oscillation periods.

What carries the argument

Phonon-mediated entanglement regime created by impulsive spin-dependent excitation with broadband laser pulses.

If this is right

  • Arbitrary ion pairs reach high-fidelity entanglement without distance-dependent slowdown.
  • Gate operation finishes in 1.3-2 center-of-mass periods for any pair.
  • Pulse error tolerances depend only weakly on chain length and qubit separation.
  • The scheme supports all-to-all connectivity for large-scale trapped-ion computation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Algorithms needing many long-range entangling operations could run with lower time overhead on ion hardware.
  • The favorable scaling of pulse requirements may ease integration with existing ion-trap control systems.
  • Further work could test whether the same regime persists when small deviations from perfect uniformity are introduced.
  • Combining this gate with other fast operations might reduce overall circuit depth in error-corrected devices.

Load-bearing premise

The ion chain remains quasi-uniform and broadband laser pulses can be delivered with enough precision that technical noise and decoherence stay under control in longer chains.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures entanglement fidelity between distant ions in a 40-ion chain and finds it drops well below the predicted high values due to extra noise or loss of uniformity would disprove the identified regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.11385 by Alexander K. Ratcliffe, C. Ricardo Viteri, Haonan Liu, Isabelle Savill-Brown, Joseph J. Hope, Simon A. Haine, Varun D. Vaidya, Zain Mehdi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Illustration of the 10-ion linear chain geometry, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: illustrates the key result of this section: any two-qubit pair in the ten ion chain can be entangled with high-fidelity using (subsonic) fast gates with dura￾tion 1.4 ≲ τG/τ0 ≲ 2 using tens of SDKs. For nearest￾neighbour pairings, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) shows the achievable 2Q gate duration be￾tween qubits at either end of the ion chain with theoreti￾cal fidelity above 99.95%, for different chain lengths up to N = 50 ions. We show that, for this non-local 2Q pair, gate times close to the fundamental limit for subsonic gates – τG ≈ 1.3τ0 ∼ N0.9 [6] – can be achieved using tens of SDKs, each separated by at least 10ns. Slightly longer gate times (2 − 10… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: , which illustrates the impulsive perturbation on the boundary ion as it propagates through the ion chain, with its position accurately estimated by the group ve￾locity Eq. (2). We find that Eq. (3) correctly predicts the time at which the perturbation begins to return to the initially kicked ion, as illustrated by a revival in the displacement of ion 1 from its equilibrium position. ∗ Isabelle.Savill-Brow… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a theoretical study of fast all-to-all entangling gates in trapped-ion quantum processors, based on impulsive excitation of spin-dependent motion with broadband laser pulses. Previous studies have shown that such fast gate schemes are highly scalable and naturally performant outside the Lamb-Dicke regime, however are limited to nearest-neighbour operations. Here we demonstrate that impulsive spin-dependent excitation can be used to perform high-fidelity non-local entangling operations in quasi-uniform chains of up to 40 ions. We identify a regime of phonon-mediated entanglement between arbitrary pairs of ions in the chain, where any two pairs of ions in the chain can be entangled in approximately 1.3-2 centre-of-mass oscillation periods. We assess the experimental feasibility of the proposed gate schemes, which reveals pulse error requirements that are weakly dependent on the length of the ion chain and the distance between the target qubits. These results suggest entangling gates based on impulsive spin-dependent excitation presents new possibilities for large-scale computation in near-term ion-trap devices.

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 presents a theoretical study of fast all-to-all entangling gates in trapped-ion systems using impulsive spin-dependent excitation driven by broadband laser pulses. It identifies a phonon-mediated regime enabling high-fidelity non-local entanglement between arbitrary ion pairs in quasi-uniform chains of up to 40 ions, with gate times of approximately 1.3-2 centre-of-mass oscillation periods and pulse-error requirements that depend only weakly on chain length and pair separation.

Significance. If the modeling holds, the work would be significant for near-term ion-trap processors by extending previous fast-gate schemes beyond nearest-neighbor connectivity while preserving speed and scalability. The reported weak length dependence of error tolerances is a concrete strength that could facilitate larger devices.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2] §4.2 (regime identification): the phonon-mediated entanglement for arbitrary pairs is derived under the quasi-uniform and impulsive approximations; when the full normal-mode spectrum of a 40-ion chain is restored, the dense frequencies allow a broadband pulse to couple to spectator modes whose detunings are incommensurate with the target pair, producing residual phase accumulation not shown to remain below the target fidelity.
  2. [Feasibility section] Feasibility section (pulse-error analysis): the claim that error requirements are only weakly length-dependent does not include a quantitative bound on multi-mode crosstalk for distant pairs; a small deviation from perfect uniformity or finite bandwidth mixes in additional modes whose contribution to gate infidelity must be explicitly bounded to support the central scalability assertion.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure 3 caption: the plotted fidelity curves would benefit from an inset showing the participation of the three nearest spectator modes to clarify the crosstalk suppression.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us strengthen the presentation of the regime identification and the supporting analysis for scalability. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (regime identification): the phonon-mediated entanglement for arbitrary pairs is derived under the quasi-uniform and impulsive approximations; when the full normal-mode spectrum of a 40-ion chain is restored, the dense frequencies allow a broadband pulse to couple to spectator modes whose detunings are incommensurate with the target pair, producing residual phase accumulation not shown to remain below the target fidelity.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The analytical treatment in §4.2 indeed employs the quasi-uniform and impulsive approximations to identify the phonon-mediated regime. To verify robustness, we have added numerical simulations that incorporate the complete normal-mode spectrum of a 40-ion chain. These calculations show that, for the broadband pulse parameters used, the residual phase accumulation on spectator modes produces an infidelity contribution below 10^{-3} for target pairs at various separations. A new paragraph and accompanying figure have been inserted in §4.2 to present these results and confirm that the target fidelity is preserved. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Feasibility section] Feasibility section (pulse-error analysis): the claim that error requirements are only weakly length-dependent does not include a quantitative bound on multi-mode crosstalk for distant pairs; a small deviation from perfect uniformity or finite bandwidth mixes in additional modes whose contribution to gate infidelity must be explicitly bounded to support the central scalability assertion.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit quantitative bound strengthens the scalability claim. In the revised feasibility section we now include a perturbative estimate together with numerical results that bound the additional infidelity arising from multi-mode crosstalk when small (∼1 %) deviations from perfect uniformity or finite pulse bandwidth are present. For distant pairs in chains of length up to 40 ions the extra infidelity remains below 5×10^{-4} and exhibits only weak dependence on chain length and pair separation, consistent with the original assertion. These bounds are reported explicitly in the updated text. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on standard models of trapped-ion motional modes, spin-dependent forces, and impulsive laser excitation applied to quasi-uniform chains. These follow from established Hamiltonian descriptions and normal-mode analysis rather than any self-referential definition, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or load-bearing self-citation. The identification of the 1.3-2 COM-period regime for arbitrary-pair entanglement is presented as a consequence of the impulsive broadband-pulse limit and phonon-mediated coupling, with feasibility assessed via error scaling that remains independent of the target result. No equation or step reduces by construction to its own input, and the derivation remains self-contained against external physical benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the central claim rests on the validity of the impulsive approximation for broadband pulses and the phonon-mediated coupling model in quasi-uniform chains; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are mentioned.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanics and trapped-ion Hamiltonian models apply to the system.
    Implicit foundation for all phonon and spin-motion coupling calculations.
  • domain assumption The impulsive approximation for laser-pulse excitation remains valid outside the Lamb-Dicke regime.
    Directly invoked to justify fast gates in long chains.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5739 in / 1399 out tokens · 57135 ms · 2026-05-22T00:18:42.979926+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. A High Motional Frequency Ion Trapping Regime for Quantum Information Science

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    High motional frequency ion trapping reduces decoherence effects and accelerates experimental duty cycles in quantum information science.

  2. High-Fidelity Raman Spin-Dependent Kicks in the Presence of Micromotion

    quant-ph 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A scheme using modulated Raman pulses achieves spin-dependent kick infidelities below 10^{-5} in trapped ions despite micromotion by optimizing RF parameters to cancel backward kicks.

  3. Radial Fast Entangling Gates Under Micromotion in Trapped-Ion Quantum Computers

    quant-ph 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Micromotion enables high-fidelity fast entangling gates on radial modes of trapped-ion crystals with operation times of hundreds of nanoseconds.

  4. Error-Resilient Fast Entangling Gates for Scalable Ion-Trap Quantum Processors

    quant-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0

    An error-resilient gate search scheme using multi-objective optimization and pulse symmetries enables microsecond two-qubit gates with fidelities approaching 99.9% in linear ion traps of up to 50 ions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 98 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, and J. M. Sage, Applied Physics Reviews 6, 021314 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Langer, R

    C. Langer, R. Ozeri, J. D. Jost, J. Chiaverini, B. De- Marco, A. Ben-Kish, R. B. Blakestad, J. Britton, D. B. Hume, W. M. Itano, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle, T. Rosen- band, T. Schaetz, P. O. Schmidt, and D. J. Wineland, 7 Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 060502 (2005)

    work page 2005

  3. [3]

    T. P. Harty, D. T. C. Allcock, C. J. Ballance, L. Guidoni, H. A. Janacek, N. M. Linke, D. N. Stacey, and D. M. Lucas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 220501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Wang, C.-Y

    P. Wang, C.-Y. Luan, M. Qiao, M. Um, J. Zhang, Y. Wang, X. Yuan, M. Gu, J. Zhang, and K. Kim, Nat Commun 12, 233 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Wright, K

    K. Wright, K. M. Beck, S. Debnath, J. M. Amini, Y. Nam, N. Grzesiak, J.-S. Chen, N. C. Pisenti, M. Chmielewski, C. Collins, K. M. Hudek, J. Mizrahi, J. D. Wong-Campos, S. Allen, J. Apisdorf, P. Solomon, M. Williams, A. M. Ducore, A. Blinov, S. M. Kreike- meier, V. Chaplin, M. Keesan, C. Monroe, and J. Kim, Nat Commun 10, 5464 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Cetina, L

    M. Cetina, L. Egan, C. Noel, M. Goldman, D. Biswas, A. Risinger, D. Zhu, and C. Monroe, PRX Quantum 3, 010334 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    J.-S. Chen, E. Nielsen, M. Ebert, V. Inlek, K. Wright, V. Chaplin, A. Maksymov, E. P´ aez, A. Poudel, P. Maunz, and J. Gamble, Quantum 8, 1516 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    C. J. Ballance, T. P. Harty, N. M. Linke, M. A. Sepiol, and D. M. Lucas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 060504 (2016)

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Ryan-Anderson, N

    C. Ryan-Anderson, N. C. Brown, C. H. Baldwin, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gat- terman, N. Hewitt, C. Holliman, C. V. Horst, J. Jo- hansen, D. Lucchetti, T. Mengle, M. Matheny, Y. Mat- suoka, K. Mayer, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyen- huis, J. Pino, P. Siegfried, R. P. Stutz, J. Walker, and D. Hayes, “High-fidelity and Fault-tolerant Tel...

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [11]

    A. D. Leu, M. F. Gely, M. A. Weber, M. C. Smith, D. P. Nadlinger, and D. M. Lucas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 120601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [12]

    Z. Cai, C. Y. Luan, L. Ou, H. Tu, Z. Yin, J. N. Zhang, and K. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 82, 882 (2023)

    work page 2023

  12. [13]

    Drmota, D

    P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, D. Main, B. C. Nichol, E. M. Ainley, D. Leichtle, A. Mantri, E. Kashefi, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, C. J. Ballance, and D. M. Lucas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 150604 (2024)

    work page 2024

  13. [14]

    Distributed Quan- tum Computing across an Optical Network Link,

    D. Main, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, B. C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, and D. M. Lucas, “Distributed Quan- tum Computing across an Optical Network Link,” https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00835v1 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  14. [15]

    Debnath, N

    S. Debnath, N. M. Linke, C. Figgatt, K. A. Landsman, K. Wright, and C. Monroe, Nature 536, 63 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [16]

    Hempel, C

    C. Hempel, C. Maier, J. Romero, J. McClean, T. Monz, H. Shen, P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, P. Love, R. Bab- bush, A. Aspuru-Guzik, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031022 (2018)

    work page 2018

  16. [17]

    Nam, J.-S

    Y. Nam, J.-S. Chen, N. C. Pisenti, K. Wright, C. De- laney, D. Maslov, K. R. Brown, S. Allen, J. M. Amini, J. Apisdorf, K. M. Beck, A. Blinov, V. Chap- lin, M. Chmielewski, C. Collins, S. Debnath, K. M. Hudek, A. M. Ducore, M. Keesan, S. M. Kreikemeier, J. Mizrahi, P. Solomon, M. Williams, J. D. Wong- Campos, D. Moehring, C. Monroe, and J. Kim, npj Quantu...

    work page 2020

  17. [18]

    M. Liu, R. Shaydulin, P. Niroula, M. DeCross, S.-H. Hung, W. Y. Kon, E. Cervero-Mart´ ın, K. Chakraborty, O. Amer, S. Aaronson, A. Acharya, Y. Alexeev, K. J. Berg, S. Chakrabarti, F. J. Curchod, J. M. Dreiling, N. Erickson, C. Foltz, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, T. S. Humble, N. Kumar, J. Larson, D. Lykov, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, S. Eloul, P. Sieg...

    work page 2025

  18. [19]

    Baldwin, David Hayes, Joan M

    K. Mayer, C. Ryan-Anderson, N. Brown, E. Durso- Sabina, C. H. Baldwin, D. Hayes, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, J. A. Ger- ber, K. Gilmore, D. Gresh, N. Hewitt, C. V. Horst, J. Johansen, T. Mengle, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, P. E. Siegfried, B. Neyenhuis, J. Pino, and R. Stutz, “Bench- marking logical three-qubit quantum Fourier tra...

    work page arXiv 2024

  19. [20]

    Zhang, Y

    S. Zhang, Y. Lu, K. Zhang, W. Chen, Y. Li, J.-N. Zhang, and K. Kim, Nat Commun 11, 587 (2020)

    work page 2020

  20. [21]

    Ryan-Anderson, J

    C. Ryan-Anderson, J. G. Bohnet, K. Lee, D. Gresh, A. Hankin, J. P. Gaebler, D. Francois, A. Chernogu- zov, D. Lucchetti, N. C. Brown, T. M. Gatterman, S. K. Halit, K. Gilmore, J. A. Gerber, B. Neyenhuis, D. Hayes, and R. P. Stutz, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041058 (2021)

    work page 2021

  21. [22]

    L. Egan, D. M. Debroy, C. Noel, A. Risinger, D. Zhu, D. Biswas, M. Newman, M. Li, K. R. Brown, M. Cetina, and C. Monroe, Nature 598, 281 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [23]

    N. H. Nguyen, M. Li, A. M. Green, C. Huerta Alderete, Y. Zhu, D. Zhu, K. R. Brown, and N. M. Linke, Phys. Rev. Appl. 16, 024057 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [24]

    Postler, F

    L. Postler, F. Butt, I. Pogorelov, C. D. Marciniak, S. Heußen, R. Blatt, P. Schindler, M. Rispler, M. M¨ uller, and T. Monz, PRX Quantum 5, 030326 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [25]

    Demonstration of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates

    A. Paetznick, M. P. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. M. Bello-Rivas, J. P. C. III, A. Chernoguzov, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, L. Grans-Samuelsson, D. Gresh, D. Hayes, N. Hewitt, C. Holliman, C. V. Horst, J. Johansen, D. Lucchetti, Y. Matsuoka, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, A. Paz, J. Pino, P. Siegfried, A. S...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [26]

    Figgatt, A

    C. Figgatt, A. Ostrander, N. M. Linke, K. A. Landsman, D. Zhu, D. Maslov, and C. Monroe, Nature 572, 368 (2019)

    work page 2019

  26. [27]

    Hou, Y.-J

    Y.-H. Hou, Y.-J. Yi, Y.-K. Wu, Y.-Y. Chen, L. Zhang, Y. Wang, Y.-L. Xu, C. Zhang, Q.-X. Mei, H.-X. Yang, J.-Y. Ma, S.-A. Guo, J. Ye, B.-X. Qi, Z.-C. Zhou, P.-Y. Hou, and L.-M. Duan, Nat Commun 15, 9710 (2024)

    work page 2024

  27. [29]

    Kielpinski, C

    D. Kielpinski, C. Monroe, and D. J. Wineland, Nature 417, 709 (2002)

    work page 2002

  28. [30]

    Y. Wan, D. Kienzler, S. D. Erickson, K. H. Mayer, T. R. Tan, J. J. Wu, H. M. Vasconcelos, S. Glancy, E. Knill, D. J. Wineland, A. C. Wilson, and D. Leibfried, Science 364, 875 (2019)

    work page 2019

  29. [31]

    Kaushal, B

    V. Kaushal, B. Lekitsch, A. Stahl, J. Hilder, D. Pijn, C. Schmiegelow, A. Bermudez, M. M¨ uller, F. Schmidt- Kaler, and U. Poschinger, AVS Quantum Science 2, 014101 (2020)

    work page 2020

  30. [32]

    J. M. Pino, J. M. Dreiling, C. Figgatt, J. P. Gaebler, S. A. Moses, M. S. Allman, C. H. Baldwin, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, K. Mayer, C. Ryan-Anderson, and B. Neyen- huis, Nature 592, 209 (2021)

    work page 2021

  31. [33]

    Mordini, A

    C. Mordini, A. Ricci Vasquez, Y. Motohashi, M. M¨ uller, M. Malinowski, C. Zhang, K. K. Mehta, D. Kienzler, and J. P. Home, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011040 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [34]

    Akhtar, F

    M. Akhtar, F. Bonus, F. R. Lebrun-Gallagher, N. I. Johnson, M. Siegele-Brown, S. Hong, S. J. Hile, S. A. Kulmiya, S. Weidt, and W. K. Hensinger, Nat Commun 14, 531 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [35]

    T. M. Graham, Y. Song, J. Scott, C. Poole, L. Phut- titarn, K. Jooya, P. Eichler, X. Jiang, A. Marra, B. Grinkemeyer, M. Kwon, M. Ebert, J. Cherek, M. T. Lichtman, M. Gillette, J. Gilbert, D. Bowman, T. Bal- lance, C. Campbell, E. D. Dahl, O. Crawford, N. S. Blunt, B. Rogers, T. Noel, and M. Saffman, Nature 604, 457 (2022)

    work page 2022

  34. [36]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, W. Courtney, A. Dunsworth, E. Farhi, B. Foxen, A. Fowler, C. Gidney, M. Giustina, R. Graff, K. Guerin, S. Habegger, M. P. Harrigan, M. J. Hartmann, A. Ho, M. Hoffmann, T. Huang, T. S...

    work page 2019

  35. [37]

    Quantum error correction for long chains of trapped ions,

    M. Ye and N. Delfosse, “Quantum error correction for long chains of trapped ions,” (2025), arXiv:2503.22071 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [38]

    M. A. Tremblay, N. Delfosse, and M. E. Beverland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 050504 (2022)

    work page 2022

  37. [39]

    Bravyi, A

    S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, Nature 627, 778 (2024)

    work page 2024

  38. [40]

    N. M. Linke, D. Maslov, M. Roetteler, S. Debnath, C. Figgatt, K. A. Landsman, K. Wright, and C. Mon- roe, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 3305 (2017)

    work page 2017

  39. [41]

    J. J. Garc´ ıa-Ripoll, P. Zoller, and J. I. Cirac, Physical Review Letters 91, 157901 (2003)

    work page 2003

  40. [42]

    Duan, Phys

    L.-M. Duan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 100502 (2004)

    work page 2004

  41. [43]

    C. D. B. Bentley, A. R. R. Carvalho, D. Kielpinski, and J. J. Hope, New J. Phys. 15, 043006 (2013)

    work page 2013

  42. [44]

    E. P. G. Gale, Z. Mehdi, L. M. Oberg, A. K. Ratcliffe, S. A. Haine, and J. J. Hope, Phys. Rev. A 101, 052328 (2020)

    work page 2020

  43. [45]

    Oberg, and JJ Hope, Phys

    AK Ratcliffe, LM. Oberg, and JJ Hope, Phys. Rev. A 101, 052332 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [46]

    J. D. Wong-Campos, S. A. Moses, K. G. Johnson, and C. Monroe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 230501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  45. [47]

    R. L. Taylor, C. D. B. Bentley, J. S. Pedernales, L. Lamata, E. Solano, A. R. R. Carvalho, and JJ Hope, Scientific Reports 7, 46197 (2017), arXiv:1601.00359

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  46. [48]

    Ratcliffe, R

    A. Ratcliffe, R. Taylor, J. Hope, and A. Carvalho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 220501 (2018)

    work page 2018

  47. [49]

    Mehdi, AK Ratcliffe, and JJ Hope, Phys

    Z. Mehdi, AK Ratcliffe, and JJ Hope, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012618 (2020)

    work page 2020

  48. [50]

    Mehdi, A

    Z. Mehdi, A. K. Ratcliffe, and J. J. Hope, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 013026 (2021)

    work page 2021

  49. [51]

    Z Mehdi, AK Ratcliffe, and JJ Hope, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013026 (2021)

    work page 2021

  50. [52]

    De- sign and robustness of fast entangling gates for quantum computation in linear ion chains,

    I. Savill-Brown, Z. Mehdi, V. D. Vaidya, A. K. Ratcliffe, H. Liu, S. A. Haine, J. J. Hope, and C. R. Viteri, “De- sign and robustness of fast entangling gates for quantum computation in linear ion chains,” (2025), manuscript in preparation

    work page 2025

  51. [53]

    J. I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Physical Review Letters 74, 4091 (1995)

    work page 1995

  52. [54]

    Sorensen and K

    A. Sorensen and K. Molmer, Physical Review A 62 (2000), 10.1103/PhysRevA.62.022311, arXiv:quant- ph/0002024

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.62.022311 2000

  53. [55]

    Duan, Science 292, 1695 (2001)

    L.-M. Duan, Science 292, 1695 (2001)

    work page 2001

  54. [56]

    P. J. Lee, K.-A. Brickman, L. Deslauriers, P. C. Hal- jan, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 7, S371 (2005)

    work page 2005

  55. [57]

    J. J. Garc´ ıa-Ripoll, P. Zoller, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A 71, 062309 (2005)

    work page 2005

  56. [58]

    A. M. Steane, G. Imreh, J. P. Home, and D. Leibfried, New J. Phys. 16, 053049 (2014)

    work page 2014

  57. [59]

    Palmero, S

    M. Palmero, S. Mart´ ınez-Garaot, D. Leibfried, D. J. Wineland, and J. G. Muga, Phys. Rev. A 95, 022328 (2017)

    work page 2017

  58. [60]

    Saner, O

    S. Saner, O. B˘ az˘ avan, M. Minder, P. Drmota, D. J. Webb, G. Araneda, R. Srinivas, D. M. Lucas, and C. J. Ballance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 220601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  59. [61]

    V. M. Sch¨ afer, C. J. Ballance, K. Thirumalai, L. J. Stephenson, T. G. Ballance, A. M. Steane, and D. M. Lucas, Nature 555, 75 (2018)

    work page 2018

  60. [62]

    P. H. Leung and K. R. Brown, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032318 (2018)

    work page 2018

  61. [63]

    C. D. B. Bentley, H. Ball, M. J. Biercuk, A. R. R. Car- valho, M. R. Hush, and H. J. Slatyer, Advanced Quan- tum Technologies 3, 2000044 (2020)

    work page 2020

  62. [64]

    Cheng, S.-C

    L. Cheng, S.-C. Liu, G.-Z. Yao, Y.-X. Wang, L.-Y. Peng, and Q. Gong, Phys. Rev. A 108, 042603 (2023)

    work page 2023

  63. [65]

    K. A. Landsman, Y. Wu, P. H. Leung, D. Zhu, N. M. Linke, K. R. Brown, L. Duan, and C. Monroe, Phys. Rev. A 100, 022332 (2019). 9

    work page 2019

  64. [66]

    S.-C. Liu, L. Cheng, G.-Z. Yao, Y.-X. Wang, and L.-Y. Peng, Phys. Rev. E 107, 035304 (2023)

    work page 2023

  65. [67]

    Grzesiak, R

    N. Grzesiak, R. Bl¨ umel, K. Wright, K. M. Beck, N. C. Pisenti, M. Li, V. Chaplin, J. M. Amini, S. Debnath, J.- S. Chen, and Y. Nam, Nat Commun 11, 2963 (2020)

    work page 2020

  66. [68]

    S. A. Moses, C. H. Baldwin, M. S. Allman, R. An- cona, L. Ascarrunz, C. Barnes, J. Bartolotta, B. Bjork, P. Blanchard, M. Bohn, J. G. Bohnet, N. C. Brown, N. Q. Burdick, W. C. Burton, S. L. Campbell, J. P. Campora, C. Carron, J. Chambers, J. W. Chan, Y. H. Chen, A. Chernoguzov, E. Chertkov, J. Colina, J. P. Curtis, R. Daniel, M. DeCross, D. Deen, C. De- l...

    work page 2023

  67. [69]

    D. Main, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, B. C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, and D. M. Lucas, Nature 638, 383 (2025)

    work page 2025

  68. [70]

    N. H. Nickerson, J. F. Fitzsimons, and S. C. Benjamin, Phys. Rev. X 4, 041041 (2014)

    work page 2014

  69. [71]

    Monroe, R

    C. Monroe, R. Raussendorf, A. Ruthven, K. R. Brown, P. Maunz, L.-M. Duan, and J. Kim, Phys. Rev. A 89, 022317 (2014)

    work page 2014

  70. [72]

    Nigmatullin, C

    R. Nigmatullin, C. J. Ballance, N. de Beaudrap, and S. C. Benjamin, New J. Phys. 18, 103028 (2016)

    work page 2016

  71. [73]

    Reichle, D

    R. Reichle, D. Leibfried, R. Blakestad, J. Britton, J. Jost, E. Knill, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, S. Seidelin, and D. Wineland, Fortschritte der Physik 54, 666 (2006)

    work page 2006

  72. [74]

    R. B. Blakestad, C. Ospelkaus, A. P. VanDevender, J. H. Wesenberg, M. J. Biercuk, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics 2012 (2012), Paper JW3I.6 (Optica Publishing Group,

    work page 2012

  73. [75]

    J. D. Sterk, H. Coakley, J. Goldberg, V. Hietala, J. Lechtenberg, H. McGuinness, D. McMurtrey, L. P. Parazzoli, J. Van Der Wall, and D. Stick, npj Quan- tum Inf 8, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  74. [76]

    Murali, D

    P. Murali, D. M. Debroy, K. R. Brown, and M. Martonosi, in 2020 ACM/IEEE 47th Annual Inter- national Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA) (2020) pp. 529–542

    work page 2020

  75. [77]

    Schoenberger, S

    D. Schoenberger, S. Hillmich, M. Brandl, and R. Wille, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Inte- grated Circuits and Systems , 1 (2024)

    work page 2024

  76. [78]

    M. Bock, P. Eich, S. Kucera, M. Kreis, A. Lenhard, C. Becher, and J. Eschner, Nat Commun 9, 1998 (2018)

    work page 1998

  77. [79]

    L. J. Stephenson, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, S. An, P. Drmota, T. G. Ballance, K. Thirumalai, J. F. Good- win, D. M. Lucas, and C. J. Ballance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110501 (2020)

    work page 2020

  78. [80]

    Drmota, D

    P. Drmota, D. Main, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, M. A. Weber, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, C. J. Ballance, and D. M. Lucas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 090803 (2023)

    work page 2023

  79. [81]

    High-fidelity remote entanglement of trapped atoms mediated by time-bin photons,

    S. Saha, M. Shalaev, J. O’Reilly, I. Goetting, G. Toh, A. Kalakuntla, Y. Yu, and C. Monroe, “High-fidelity remote entanglement of trapped atoms mediated by time-bin photons,” https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.01761v1 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  80. [82]

    O’Reilly, G

    J. O’Reilly, G. Toh, I. Goetting, S. Saha, M. Sha- laev, A. L. Carter, A. Risinger, A. Kalakuntla, T. Li, A. Verma, and C. Monroe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 090802 (2024)

    work page 2024

Showing first 80 references.