- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Applied

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Random pulse sequences for qubit noise spectroscopy

Kaixin Huang1,2,*, Demitry Farfurnik3, Alireza Seif1,2,4, Mohammad Hafezi1,2, and Yi-Kai Liu2,5

  • *Contact author: kxhuang@umd.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Applied 23, 054090 – Published 30 May, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.23.054090

Abstract

Qubit noise spectroscopy is an important tool for the experimental investigation of open quantum systems. However, conventional techniques for noise spectroscopy are time-consuming, because they require measurements of the noise spectral density at many different frequencies. Here we describe an alternative approach to noise spectroscopy, which requires fewer resources, and relies on direct measurement of arbitrary linear functionals of the noise spectral density. This method uses random pulse sequences with carefully controlled correlations, which are chosen using algorithms for phase retrieval. These measurements allow us to reconstruct sparse noise spectra via compressed sensing. Our simulations of the performance of the random pulse sequences on a realistic physical system, self-assembled quantum dots, reveal a speedup of an order of magnitude in extracting the noise spectrum, compared to conventional dynamical decoupling approaches.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (63)

  1. F. Yan, J. Bylander, S. Gustavsson, F. Yoshihara, K. Harrabi, D. G. Cory, T. P. Orlando, Y. Nakamura, J.-S. Tsai, and W. D. Oliver, Spectroscopy of low-frequency noise and its temperature dependence in a superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. B 85, 174521 (2012).
  2. O. E. Dial, M. D. Shulman, S. P. Harvey, H. Bluhm, V. Umansky, and A. Yacoby, Charge noise spectroscopy using coherent exchange oscillations in a singlet-triplet qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 146804 (2013).
  3. J. T. Muhonen, J. P. Dehollain, A. Laucht, F. E. Hudson, R. Kalra, T. Sekiguchi, K. M. Itoh, D. N. Jamieson, J. C. McCallum, A. S. Dzurak, et al., Storing quantum information for 30 seconds in a nanoelectronic device, Nat. Nanotechnol. 9, 986 (2014).
  4. F. Reinhard, F. Shi, N. Zhao, F. Rempp, B. Naydenov, J. Meijer, L. T. Hall, L. Hollenberg, J. Du, R.-B. Liu, and J. Wrachtrup, Tuning a spin bath through the quantum-classical transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 200402 (2012).
  5. N. Bar-Gill, L. M. Pham, C. Belthangady, D. Le Sage, P. Cappellaro, J. Maze, M. D. Lukin, A. Yacoby, and R. Walsworth, Suppression of spin-bath dynamics for improved coherence of multi-spin-qubit systems, Nat. Commun. 3, 1 (2012).
  6. Y. Romach, C. Müller, T. Unden, L. J. Rogers, T. Isoda, K. M. Itoh, M. Markham, A. Stacey, J. Meijer, S. Pezzagna, B. Naydenov, L. P. McGuinness, N. Bar-Gill, and F. Jelezko, Spectroscopy of surface-induced noise using shallow spins in diamond, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 017601 (2015).
  7. C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 035002 (2017).
  8. T. Yuge, S. Sasaki, and Y. Hirayama, Measurement of the noise spectrum using a multiple-pulse sequence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 170504 (2011).
  9. G. A. Álvarez and D. Suter, Measuring the spectrum of colored noise by dynamical decoupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 230501 (2011).
  10. K. C. Young and K. B. Whaley, Qubits as spectrometers of dephasing noise, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012314 (2012).
  11. L. M. Norris, G. A. Paz-Silva, and L. Viola, Qubit noise spectroscopy for non-Gaussian dephasing environments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 150503 (2016).
  12. G. A. Paz-Silva, L. M. Norris, and L. Viola, Multiqubit spectroscopy of Gaussian quantum noise, Phys. Rev. A 95, 022121 (2017).
  13. C. Ferrie, C. Granade, G. Paz-Silva, and H. M. Wiseman, Bayesian quantum noise spectroscopy, New J. Phys. 20, 123005 (2018).
  14. U. Haeberlen, Advances in Magnetic Resonance (Academic Press, New York, 1976), Vol. 1.
  15. L. M. Vandersypen and I. L. Chuang, NMR techniques for quantum control and computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 1037 (2005).
  16. J. Bylander, S. Gustavsson, F. Yan, F. Yoshihara, K. Harrabi, G. Fitch, D. G. Cory, Y. Nakamura, J.-S. Tsai, and W. D. Oliver, Noise spectroscopy through dynamical decoupling with a superconducting flux qubit, Nat. Phys. 7, 565 (2011).
  17. Y.-X. Wang and A. A. Clerk, Intrinsic and induced quantum quenches for enhancing qubit-based quantum noise spectroscopy, Nat. Commun. 12, 1 (2021).
  18. F. K. Malinowski, F. Martins, P. D. Nissen, E. Barnes, Ł. Cywiński, M. S. Rudner, S. Fallahi, G. C. Gardner, M. J. Manfra, C. M. Marcus, et al., Notch filtering the nuclear environment of a spin qubit, Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 16 (2017).
  19. K. Chan, W. Huang, C. Yang, J. Hwang, B. Hensen, T. Tanttu, F. Hudson, K. M. Itoh, A. Laucht, A. Morello, et al., Assessment of a silicon quantum dot spin qubit environment via noise spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 044017 (2018).
  20. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  21. K. Jaganathan, Y. C. Eldar, and B. Hassibi, Phase retrieval: An overview of recent developments, in Optical Compressive Imaging, edited by A. Stern (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2016), pp. 279–312.
  22. F. Serinaldi and F. Lombardo, BetaBit: A fast generator of autocorrelated binary processes for geophysical research, Europhys. Lett. 118, 30007 (2017).
  23. F. Serinaldi and F. Lombardo, General simulation algorithm for autocorrelated binary processes, Phys. Rev. E 95, 023312 (2017).
  24. K. Schultz, G. Quiroz, P. Titum, and B. Clader, SchWARMA: A model-based approach for time-correlated noise in quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033229 (2021).
  25. A. Murphy, J. Epstein, G. Quiroz, K. Schultz, L. Tewala, K. McElroy, C. Trout, B. Tien-Street, J. A. Hoffmann, B. Clader, et al., Universal-dephasing-noise injection via Schrödinger-wave autoregressive moving-average models, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013081 (2022).
  26. E. J. Candès and M. B. Wakin, An introduction to compressive sampling, IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 25, 21 (2008).
  27. E. J. Candès and Y. Plan, A probabilistic and ripless theory of compressed sensing, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 57, 7235 (2011).
  28. K. Seetharam, D. Biswas, C. Noel, A. Risinger, D. Zhu, O. Katz, S. Chattopadhyay, M. Cetina, C. Monroe, E. Demler, et al., Digital quantum simulation of NMR experiments, Sci. Adv. 9, eadh2594 (2023).
  29. M. Bostock and D. Nietlispach, Compressed sensing: Reconstruction of non-uniformly sampled multidimensional NMR data, Concepts Magn. Reson. Part A 46, e21438 (2017).
  30. R. Stockill, C. Le Gall, C. Matthiesen, L. Huthmacher, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, and M. Atatüre, Quantum dot spin coherence governed by a strained nuclear environment, Nat. Commun. 7, 1 (2016).
  31. D. Farfurnik, H. Singh, Z. Luo, A. S. Bracker, S. G. Carter, R. M. Pettit, and E. Waks, All-optical noise spectroscopy of a solid-state spin, Nano Lett. 23, 1781 (2023).
  32. H. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, USA, 2002).
  33. U. Weiss, Quantum Dissipative Systems (World Scientific, Singapore, 1993).
  34. L. Viola, E. Knill, and S. Lloyd, Dynamical decoupling of open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2417 (1999).
  35. K. Khodjasteh, T. Erdélyi, and L. Viola, Limits on preserving quantum coherence using multipulse control, Phys. Rev. A 83, 020305 (2011).
  36. L. Cywiński, R. M. Lutchyn, C. P. Nave, and S. Das Sarma, How to enhance dephasing time in superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. B 77, 174509 (2008).
  37. G. Ithier, E. Collin, P. Joyez, P. Meeson, D. Vion, D. Esteve, F. Chiarello, A. Shnirman, Y. Makhlin, J. Schriefl, et al., Decoherence in a superconducting quantum bit circuit, Phys. Rev. B–Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 72, 134519 (2005).
  38. A. J. Leggett, S. Chakravarty, A. T. Dorsey, M. P. Fisher, A. Garg, and W. Zwerger, Dynamics of the dissipative two-state system, Rev. Mod. Phys. 59, 1 (1987).
  39. G. A. Paz-Silva and L. Viola, General transfer-function approach to noise filtering in open-loop quantum control, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 250501 (2014).
  40. P. Szańkowski and Ł. Cywiński, Accuracy of dynamical-decoupling-based spectroscopy of Gaussian noise, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032101 (2018).
  41. P. Szańkowski, Transition between continuous and discrete spectra in dynamical-decoupling noise spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 100, 052115 (2019).
  42. M. Rosenblatt, Stationary Sequences and Random Fields (Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2012).
  43. Fejér-Riesz theorem, 2023. Encyclopedia of Mathematics, http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?Title=Fej%C3%A9r-Riesz_theorem&oldid=53455.
  44. L. Fejér, Über trigonometrische polynome, Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik 1916, 53 (1916).
  45. A. Kwiatkowski, Optimized experiment design and analysis for fully randomized benchmarking. PhD thesis, University of Colorado at Boulder, 2024.
  46. T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, J. H. Friedman, and J. H. Friedman, The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining Inference, and Prediction (Springer, New York, 2009), Vol. 2.
  47. J. Choi, H. Zhou, H. S. Knowles, R. Landig, S. Choi, and M. D. Lukin, Robust dynamic Hamiltonian engineering of many-body spin systems, Phys. Rev. X 10, 031002 (2020).
  48. In principle, it is possible to design random pulse sequences with window functions that are more suitable for parametric fitting of 1/f noise. It is an interesting question whether this approach could perform better than parametric fitting of 1/f noise using CPMG pulse sequences.
  49. IonQ Harmony, https://ionq.com/quantum-systems/harmony.
  50. Q.-M. Chen, H. Rabitz, and R.-B. Wu, Quantum optimal control without arbitrary waveform generators, Phys. Rev. Appl. 20, 064016 (2023).
  51. E. J. Candès and C. Fernandez-Granda, Towards a mathematical theory of super-resolution, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 67, 906 (2014).
  52. G. Tang, B. N. Bhaskar, P. Shah, and B. Recht, Compressed sensing off the grid, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 59, 7465 (2013).
  53. Y. Chi and M. F. Da Costa, Harnessing sparsity over the continuum: Atomic norm minimization for superresolution, IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 37, 39 (2020).
  54. Y. Romach, A. Lazariev, I. Avrahami, F. Kleißler, S. Arroyo-Camejo, and N. Bar-Gill, Measuring environmental quantum noise exhibiting a nonmonotonic spectral shape, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 014064 (2019).
  55. K. Huang, Data for random pulse sequences for qubit noise spectroscopy, 2025.
  56. L. Viola and S. Lloyd, Dynamical suppression of decoherence in two-state quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A 58, 2733 (1998).
  57. G. S. Uhrig, Keeping a quantum bit alive by optimized π-pulse sequences, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 100504 (2007).
  58. G. S. Uhrig, Exact results on dynamical decoupling by π pulses in quantum information processes, New J. Phys. 10, 083024 (2008).
  59. T. P. Speed and H. T. Kiiveri, Gaussian Markov distributions over finite graphs, Ann. Stat. 14, 138 (1986).
  60. J. M. Ribando, Measuring solid angles beyond dimension three, Discrete Comput. Geom. 36, 479 (2006).
  61. R. Vershynin, Introduction to the non-asymptotic analysis of random matrices, in Compressed Sensing: Theory and Applications, edited by Y. C. Eldar and G. Kutyniok (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012), pp. 210–268.
  62. M. R. Jerrum, L. G. Valiant, and V. V. Vazirani, Random generation of combinatorial structures from a uniform distribution, Theor. Comput. Sci. 43, 169 (1986).
  63. A. S. Nemirovsky and D. B. Yudin, Problem complexity and method efficiency in optimization (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1983).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Applied 23, 054090– Published 30 May, 2025
  • Received 4 June 2024
  • Revised 4 April 2025
  • Accepted 2 May 2025
Article part of CHORUS
Crossmark - Check for updates button

© 2025 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation