J. P. Campora

Computing with many encoded logical qubits beyond break-even

Shival Dasu [1], Matthew DeCross [1], Andrew Y. Guo [1], Ali Lavasani [1], Jan Behrends [2], Asmae Benhemou [3], Yi-Hsiang Chen [1], Karl Mayer [1], Chris N. Self [2], Selwyn Simsek [3], Basudha Srivastava [2,1], M. S. Allman, Jake Arkinstall [2], Justin G. Bohnet [1], Nathaniel Q. Burdick [4,1], J. P. Campora, Alex Chernoguzov [1], Samuel F. Cooper [1], Robert D. Delaney [1], Joan M. Dreiling [1], Brian Estey [1], Caroline Figgatt [1], Cameron Foltz [1], John P. Gaebler [1], Alex Hall [1], Craig A. Holliman [5], Ali A. Husain [4], Akhil Isanaka [1], Colin J. Kennedy [1], Yuga Kodama [5], Nikhil Kotibhaskar [3], Nathan K. Lysne [5], Ivaylo S. Madjarov [1], Michael Mills [1], Alistair R. Milne [3], Brian Neyenhuis [1], Annie J. Park [1], Anthony Ransford [1], Adam P. Reed [1], Steven J. Sanders [1], Charles H. Baldwin [1], David Hayes [1], Ben Criger [2], Andrew C. Potter [1], David Amaro [3]

Abstract

High-rate quantum error correcting (QEC) codes encode many logical qubits in a given number of physical qubits, making them promising candidates for quantum computation. Implementing high-rate codes at a scale that both frustrates classical computing and improves performance by encoding requires both high fidelity gates and long-range qubit connectivity -- both of which are offered by trapped-ion quantum computers. Here, we demonstrate computations that outperform their unencoded counterparts in the high-rate $[[ k+2,\, k,\, 2 ]]$ iceberg quantum error detecting (QED) and $[[ (k_2 + 2)(k_1 + 2),\, k_2k_1,\, 4 ]]$ two-level concatenated iceberg QEC codes, using the 98-qubit Quantinuum Helios trapped-ion quantum processor. Utilizing new gadgets for encoded operations, we realize this "beyond break-even" performance with reasonable postselection rates across a range of fault-tolerant (FT) and partially-fault-tolerant (pFT) component and application benchmarks with between $48$ and $94$ logical qubits. These benchmarks include FT state preparation and measurement, QEC cycle benchmarking, logical gate benchmarking, GHZ state preparation, and a pFT quantum simulation of the three-dimensional $XY$ model of quantum magnetism. Additionally, we illustrate that postselection rates can be suppressed by increasing the code distance via concatenation. Our results represent state-of-the-art logical component and state fidelities and provide evidence that high-rate QED/QEC codes are viable on contemporary quantum computers for near-term beyond-classical-scale computation.

Helios: A 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer

Anthony Ransford [1], M. S. Allman, Jake Arkinstall [2,1], J. P. Campora, Samuel F. Cooper [1], Robert D. Delaney [1], Joan M. Dreiling [1], Brian Estey [1], Caroline Figgatt [1], Alex Hall [1], Ali A. Husain [3], Akhil Isanaka [1], Colin J. Kennedy [1], Nikhil Kotibhaskar [4], Ivaylo S. Madjarov [1], Karl Mayer [1], Alistair R. Milne [4], Annie J. Park [1], Adam P. Reed [1], Riley Ancona [1], Molly P. Andersen [5], Pablo Andres-Martinez [2], Will Angenent [2], Liz Argueta [1], Benjamin Arkin [1], Leonardo Ascarrunz [1], William Baker [1], Corey Barnes [1], John Bartolotta [1], Jordan Berg [1], Ryan Besand [1], Bryce Bjork [1], Matt Blain [5], Paul Blanchard [1], Robin Blume-Kohout [6], Matt Bohn [1,2], Agustin Borgna, Daniel Y. Botamanenko [1], Robert Boutelle [1], Natalie Brown [1], Grant T. Buckingham [1], Nathaniel Q. Burdick [3], William Cody Burton [1], Varis Carey [1], Christopher J. Carron [5], Joe Chambers [1], John Children [2], Victor E. Colussi [1], Steven Crepinsek [1], Andrew Cureton [1], Joe Davies [5], Daniel Davis [1], Matthew DeCross [1], David Deen [3], Conor Delaney [1], Davide DelVento [1], B. J. DeSalvo, Jason Dominy [1], Ross Duncan [7], Vanya Eccles [2], Alec Edgington [2], Neal Erickson [1], Stephen Erickson [1], Christopher T. Ertsgaard [5], Bruce Evans [1], Tyler Evans [1], Maya I. Fabrikant [1], Andrew Fischer [1], Cameron Foltz [1], Michael Foss-Feig [1], David Francois [1], Brad Freyberg [1], Charles Gao [1], Robert Garay [1], Jane Garvin [1], David M. Gaudiosi [1], Christopher N. Gilbreth [1], Josh Giles [1], Erin Glynn [1], Jeff Graves [1], Azure Hansen [1], David Hayes [1], Lukas Heidemann [2], Bob Higashi [5], Tyler Hilbun [1], Jordan Hines [6], Ariana Hlavaty [2], Kyle Hoffman [1], Ian M. Hoffman [1], Craig Holliman [7], Isobel Hooper [2], Bob Horning [5], James Hostetter [3], Daniel Hothem [8], Jack Houlton [1], Jared Hout [1], Ross Hutson [1], Ryan T. Jacobs [1], Trent Jacobs [1], Melf Johannsen [2], Jacob Johansen [1], Loren Jones [1], Sydney Julian [1], Ryan Jung [5], Aidan Keay [2], Todd Klein [5], Mark Koch [2], Ryo Kondo [1], Chang Kong [1], Asa Kosto [1], Alan Lawrence [2], David Liefer [1], Michelle Lollie [1], Dominic Lucchetti [1], Nathan K. Lysne [7], Christian Lytle [1], Callum MacPherson [2], Andrew Malm [1], Spencer Mather [1], Brian Mathewson [1], Daniel Maxwell [3], Lauren McCaffrey [1], Hannah McDougall [1], Robin Mendoza [1], Michael Mills [1], Richard Morrison [2], Louis Narmour [1], Nhung Nguyen [1], Lora Nugent [1], Scott Olson [5], Daniel Ouellette [5], Jeremy Parks [1], Zach Peters [1], Jessie Petricka [1], Juan M. Pino [1], Frank Polito [1], Matthias Preidl [5], Gabriel Price [1], Timothy Proctor [8], McKinley Pugh [1], Noah Ratcliff [1], Daisy Raymondson [1], Peter Rhodes [1], Conrad Roman [1], Craig Roy [2], Ciaran Ryan-Anderson [1], Fernando Betanzo Sanchez [2], George Sangiolo [2], Tatiana Sawadski [2], Andrew Schaffer [3], Peter Schow [1], Jon Sedlacek [3], Henry Semenenko [2], Peter Shevchuk [1], Susan Shore [5], Peter Siegfried [1], Kartik Singhal [1], Seyon Sivarajah [2], Thomas Skripka [1], Lucas Sletten [3], Ben Spaun [1], R. Tucker Sprenkle [1], Paul Stoufer [1], Mariel Tader [1], Stephen F. Taylor [3], Travis H. Thompson [2], Raanan Tobey [1], Anh Tran [1], Tam Tran [1], Grahame Vittorini [3], Curtis Volin [3], Jim Walker [1], Sam White [2], Douglas Wilson [2], Quinn Wolf [1], Chester Wringe [2], Kevin Young [8], Jian Zheng [1], Kristen Zuraski [1], Charles H. Baldwin [1], Alex Chernoguzov [1], John P. Gaebler [1], Steven J. Sanders [1], Brian Neyenhuis [1], Russell Stutz [1], Justin G. Bohnet [1]

Abstract

We report on Quantinuum Helios, a 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum processor based on the quantum charge-coupled device (QCCD) architecture. Helios features $^{137}$Ba$^{+}$ hyperfine qubits, all-to-all connectivity enabled by a rotatable ion storage ring connecting two quantum operation regions by a junction, speed improvements from parallelized operations, and a new software stack with real-time compilation of dynamic programs. Averaged over all operational zones in the system, we achieve average infidelities of $2.5(1)\times10^{-5}$ for single-qubit gates, $7.9(2)\times10^{-4}$ for two-qubit gates, and $4.8(6)\times10^{-4}$ for state preparation and measurement, none of which are fundamentally limited and likely able to be improved. These component infidelities are predictive of system-level performance in both random Clifford circuits and random circuit sampling, the latter demonstrating that Helios operates well beyond the reach of classical simulation and establishes a new frontier of fidelity and complexity for quantum computers.

Certified randomness amplification by dynamically probing remote random quantum states

Minzhao Liu [1], Pradeep Niroula [1], Matthew DeCross [2], Cameron Foreman [3], Wen Yu Kon [1], Ignatius William Primaatmaja [1,2], M. S. Allman, J. P. Campora, Akhil Isanaka [2], Kartik Singhal [2], Omar Amer [1], Shouvanik Chakrabarti [1], Kaushik Chakraborty [1], Samuel F. Cooper [2], Robert D. Delaney [2], Joan M. Dreiling [2], Brian Estey [2], Caroline Figgatt [2], Cameron Foltz [2], John P. Gaebler [2], Alex Hall [2], Zichang He [1], Craig A. Holliman [4], Travis S. Humble [5], Shih-Han Hung [6], Ali A. Husain [7], Yuwei Jin [1], Fatih Kaleoglu [1], Colin J. Kennedy [2], Nikhil Kotibhaskar [3], Nathan K. Lysne [4], Ivaylo S. Madjarov [2], Michael Mills [2], Alistair R. Milne [3], Kevin Milner [3], Louis Narmour [2], Sivaprasad Omanakuttan [1], Annie J. Park [2], Michael A. Perlin [1], Adam P. Reed [2], Chris N. Self [8], Matthew Steinberg [1], David T. Stephen [2], Joseph Sullivan [1], Alex Chernoguzov [2], Florian J. Curchod [8], Anthony Ransford [2], Justin G. Bohnet [2], Brian Neyenhuis [2], Michael Foss-Feig [2], Rob Otter [1], Ruslan Shaydulin [1]

Abstract

Cryptography depends on truly unpredictable numbers, but physical sources emit biased or correlated bits. Quantum mechanics enables the amplification of imperfect randomness into nearly perfect randomness, but prior demonstrations have required physically co-located, loophole-free Bell tests, constraining the feasibility of remote operation. Here we realize certified randomness amplification across a network by dynamically probing large, entangled quantum states on Quantinuum's 98-qubit Helios trapped-ion quantum processor. Our protocol is secure even if the remote device acts maliciously or is compromised by an intercepting adversary, provided the samples are generated quickly enough to preclude classical simulation of the quantum circuits. We stream quantum gates in real time to the quantum processor, maintain quantum state coherence for $\approx 0.9$ seconds, and then reveal the measurement bases to the quantum processor only milliseconds before measurement. This limits the time for classical spoofing to 30 ms and constrains the location of hypothetical adversaries to a $4{,}500$ km radius. We achieve a fidelity of 0.586 on random circuits with 64 qubits and 276 two-qubit gates, enabling the amplification of realistic imperfect randomness with a low entropy rate into nearly perfect randomness.

Realization of a Quantum Streaming Algorithm on Long-lived Trapped-ion Qubits

Pradeep Niroula [1], Shouvanik Chakrabarti [1], Steven Kordonowy [1], Niraj Kumar [1], Sivaprasad Omanakuttan [1], Michael A. Perlin [1,2], M. S. Allman, J. P. Campora, Alex Chernoguzov [2], Samuel F. Cooper [2], Robert D. Delaney [2], Joan M. Dreiling [2], Brian Estey [2], Caroline Figgatt [2], Cameron Foltz [2], John P. Gaebler [2], Alex Hall [2], Ali A. Husain [3], Akhil Isanaka [2], Colin J. Kennedy [2], Nikhil Kotibhaskar [4], Ivaylo S. Madjarov [2], Michael Mills [2], Alistair R. Milne [4], Louis Narmour [2], Annie J. Park [2], Adam P. Reed [2], Kartik Singhal [2], Anthony Ransford [2], Justin G. Bohnet [2], Brian Neyenhuis [2], Rob Otter [1], Ruslan Shaydulin [1]

Abstract

Large classical datasets are often processed in the streaming model, with data arriving one item at a time. In this model, quantum algorithms have been shown to offer an unconditional exponential advantage in space. However, experimentally implementing such streaming algorithms requires qubits that remain coherent while interacting with an external data stream. In this work, we realize such a data-streaming model using Quantinuum Helios trapped-ion quantum computer with long-lived qubits that communicate with an external server. We implement a quantum pair sketch, which is the primitive underlying many quantum streaming algorithms, and use it to solve Hidden Matching, a problem known to exhibit a theoretical exponential quantum advantage in space. Furthermore, we compile the quantum streaming algorithm to fault-tolerant quantum architectures based on surface and bivariate bicycle codes and show that the quantum space advantage persists even with the overheads of fault-tolerance.

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

A. Paetznick [1], M. P. da Silva [1], C. Ryan-Anderson [2], J. M. Bello-Rivas [1], J. P. Campora [2], A. Chernoguzov [2], J. M. Dreiling [2], C. Foltz [2], F. Frachon [1], J. P. Gaebler [2], T. M. Gatterman [2], L. Grans-Samuelsson [1], D. Gresh [2], D. Hayes [2], N. Hewitt [2], C. Holliman [2], C. V. Horst [2], J. Johansen [2], D. Lucchetti [2], Y. Matsuoka [2], M. Mills [2], S. A. Moses [2], B. Neyenhuis [2], A. Paz [1], J. Pino [2], P. Siegfried [2], A. Sundaram [1], D. Tom [1], S. J. Wernli [1], M. Zanner [1], R. P. Stutz [2], K. M. Svore [1,2,19]

Abstract

The promise of quantum computers hinges on the ability to scale to large system sizes, e.g., to run quantum computations consisting of more than 100 million operations fault-tolerantly. This in turn requires suppressing errors to levels inversely proportional to the size of the computation. As a step towards this ambitious goal, we present experiments on a trapped-ion QCCD processor where, through the use of fault-tolerant encoding and error correction, we are able to suppress logical error rates to levels below the physical error rates. In particular, we entangled logical qubits encoded in the [[7,1,3]] code with error rates 9.8 times to 500 times lower than at the physical level, and entangled logical qubits encoded in a [[12,2,4]] code based on Knill's C4/C6 scheme with error rates 4.7 times to 800 times lower than at the physical level, depending on the judicious use of post-selection. Moreover, we demonstrate repeated error correction with the [[12,2,4]] code, with logical error rates below physical circuit baselines corresponding to repeated CNOTs, and show evidence that the error rate per error correction cycle, which consists of over 100 physical CNOTs, approaches the error rate of two physical CNOTs. These results signify a transition from noisy intermediate scale quantum computing to reliable quantum computing, and demonstrate advanced capabilities toward large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computing.

A Race Track Trapped-Ion Quantum Processor

S. A. Moses [1], C. H. Baldwin [1], M. S. Allman [1], R. Ancona [1], L. Ascarrunz [1], C. Barnes [1], J. Bartolotta [1], B. Bjork [1], P. Blanchard [1], M. Bohn [1], J. G. Bohnet [1], N. C. Brown [1], N. Q. Burdick [2], W. C. Burton [1], S. L. Campbell [1], J. P. Campora [1], C. Carron [3], J. Chambers [1], J. W. Chan [1], Y. H. Chen [1], A. Chernoguzov [1], E. Chertkov [1], J. Colina [1], J. P. Curtis [1], R. Daniel [1], M. DeCross [1], D. Deen [3], C. Delaney [1], J. M. Dreiling [1], C. T. Ertsgaard [3], J. Esposito [1], B. Estey [1], M. Fabrikant [1], C. Figgatt [1], C. Foltz [1], M. Foss-Feig [1], D. Francois [1], J. P. Gaebler [1], T. M. Gatterman [1], C. N. Gilbreth [1], J. Giles [1], E. Glynn [1], A. Hall [1], A. M. Hankin [1], A. Hansen [1], D. Hayes [1], B. Higashi [3], I. M. Hoffman [1], B. Horning [3], J. J. Hout [1], R. Jacobs [1], J. Johansen [1], L. Jones [1], J. Karcz [4], T. Klein [3], P. Lauria [1], P. Lee [1], D. Liefer [1], C. Lytle [1], S. T. Lu [4], D. Lucchetti [1], A. Malm [1], M. Matheny [1], B. Mathewson [1], K. Mayer [1], D. B. Miller [1], M. Mills [1], B. Neyenhuis [1], L. Nugent [1], S. Olson [3], J. Parks [1], G. N. Price [1], Z. Price [1], M. Pugh [1], A. Ransford [1], A. P. Reed [1], C. Roman [1], M. Rowe [1], C. Ryan-Anderson [1], S. Sanders [1], J. Sedlacek [2], P. Shevchuk [1], P. Siegfried [1], T. Skripka [1], B. Spaun [1], R. T. Sprenkle [1], R. P. Stutz [1], M. Swallows [1], R. I. Tobey [1], A. Tran [1], T. Tran [1], E. Vogt [4], C. Volin [1], J. Walker [1], A. M. Zolot [1], J. M. Pino [1]

Abstract

We describe and benchmark a new quantum charge-coupled device (QCCD) trapped-ion quantum computer based on a linear trap with periodic boundary conditions, which resembles a race track. The new system successfully incorporates several technologies crucial to future scalability, including electrode broadcasting, multi-layer RF routing, and magneto-optical trap (MOT) loading, while maintaining, and in some cases exceeding, the gate fidelities of previous QCCD systems. The system is initially operated with 32 qubits, but future upgrades will allow for more. We benchmark the performance of primitive operations, including an average state preparation and measurement error of 1.6(1)$\times 10^{-3}$, an average single-qubit gate infidelity of $2.5(3)\times 10^{-5}$, and an average two-qubit gate infidelity of $1.84(5)\times 10^{-3}$. The system-level performance of the quantum processor is assessed with mirror benchmarking, linear cross-entropy benchmarking, a quantum volume measurement of $\mathrm{QV}=2^{16}$, and the creation of 32-qubit entanglement in a GHZ state. We also tested application benchmarks including Hamiltonian simulation, QAOA, error correction on a repetition code, and dynamics simulations using qubit reuse. We also discuss future upgrades to the new system aimed at adding more qubits and capabilities.

Implementing Fault-tolerant Entangling Gates on the Five-qubit Code and the Color Code

C. Ryan-Anderson [1], N. C. Brown [1], M. S. Allman [1], B. Arkin [1], G. Asa-Attuah [2], C. Baldwin [1], J. Berg, J. G. Bohnet [1], S. Braxton [1], N. Burdick [2], J. P. Campora [1], A. Chernoguzov [1], J. Esposito [1], B. Evans [1], D. Francois [1], J. P. Gaebler [1], T. M. Gatterman [1], J. Gerber [1], K. Gilmore [1], D. Gresh [1], A. Hall [1], A. Hankin [1], J. Hostetter [2], D. Lucchetti [1], K. Mayer [1], J. Myers [2], B. Neyenhuis [1], J. Santiago [2], J. Sedlacek [2], T. Skripka [1], A. Slattery [2], R. P. Stutz [1], J. Tait [2], R. Tobey [1], G. Vittorini [2], J. Walker [1], D. Hayes [1]

Abstract

We compare two different implementations of fault-tolerant entangling gates on logical qubits. In one instance, a twelve-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer is used to implement a non-transversal logical CNOT gate between two five qubit codes. The operation is evaluated with varying degrees of fault tolerance, which are provided by including quantum error correction circuit primitives known as flagging and pieceable fault tolerance. In the second instance, a twenty-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer is used to implement a transversal logical CNOT gate on two [[7,1,3]] color codes. The two codes were implemented on different but similar devices, and in both instances, all of the quantum error correction primitives, including the determination of corrections via decoding, are implemented during runtime using a classical compute environment that is tightly integrated with the quantum processor. For different combinations of the primitives, logical state fidelity measurements are made after applying the gate to different input states, providing bounds on the process fidelity. We find the highest fidelity operations with the color code, with the fault-tolerant SPAM operation achieving fidelities of 0.99939(15) and 0.99959(13) when preparing eigenstates of the logical X and Z operators, which is higher than the average physical qubit SPAM fidelities of 0.9968(2) and 0.9970(1) for the physical X and Z bases, respectively. When combined with a logical transversal CNOT gate, we find the color code to perform the sequence--state preparation, CNOT, measure out--with an average fidelity bounded by [0.9957,0.9963]. The logical fidelity bounds are higher than the analogous physical-level fidelity bounds, which we find to be [0.9850,0.9903], reflecting multiple physical noise sources such as SPAM errors for two qubits, several single-qubit gates, a two-qubit gate and some amount of memory error.