Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gehér, György P., Jastrzebski, Marcin, Campbell, Earl T., Crawford, Ophelia
Format: Preprint
Published: 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.00758
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866912259266052096
author Gehér, György P.
Jastrzebski, Marcin
Campbell, Earl T.
Crawford, Ophelia
author_facet Gehér, György P.
Jastrzebski, Marcin
Campbell, Earl T.
Crawford, Ophelia
contents Whether to reset qubits, or not, during quantum error correction experiments is a question of both foundational and practical importance for quantum computing. Text-book quantum error correction demands that qubits are reset after measurement. However, fast qubit reset has proven challenging to execute at high fidelity. Consequently, many cutting-edge quantum error correction experiments are opting for the no-reset approach, where physical reset is not performed. It has recently been postulated that no-reset is functionally equivalent to reset procedures, as well as being faster and easier. For memory experiments, we confirm numerically that resetting provides no benefit. On the other hand, we identify a remarkable difference during logical operations. We find that unconditionally resetting qubits can reduce the duration of fault-tolerant logical operation by up to a factor of two as the number of measurement errors that can be tolerated is doubled. We support this with numerical simulations. However, our simulations also reveal that the no-reset performance is superior if the reset duration and infidelity exceed given thresholds. For example, with the noise model we considered, we find the no-reset performance to be superior when the reset duration is greater than approximately $100$ ns and the physical error probability is greater than approximately $10^{-2.5} \approx 0.003$. Lastly, we introduce two novel syndrome extraction circuits that can reduce the time overhead of no-reset approaches. Our findings provide guidance on how experimentalists should design future experiments.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2408_00758
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle To reset, or not to reset -- that is the question
Gehér, György P.
Jastrzebski, Marcin
Campbell, Earl T.
Crawford, Ophelia
Quantum Physics
Whether to reset qubits, or not, during quantum error correction experiments is a question of both foundational and practical importance for quantum computing. Text-book quantum error correction demands that qubits are reset after measurement. However, fast qubit reset has proven challenging to execute at high fidelity. Consequently, many cutting-edge quantum error correction experiments are opting for the no-reset approach, where physical reset is not performed. It has recently been postulated that no-reset is functionally equivalent to reset procedures, as well as being faster and easier. For memory experiments, we confirm numerically that resetting provides no benefit. On the other hand, we identify a remarkable difference during logical operations. We find that unconditionally resetting qubits can reduce the duration of fault-tolerant logical operation by up to a factor of two as the number of measurement errors that can be tolerated is doubled. We support this with numerical simulations. However, our simulations also reveal that the no-reset performance is superior if the reset duration and infidelity exceed given thresholds. For example, with the noise model we considered, we find the no-reset performance to be superior when the reset duration is greater than approximately $100$ ns and the physical error probability is greater than approximately $10^{-2.5} \approx 0.003$. Lastly, we introduce two novel syndrome extraction circuits that can reduce the time overhead of no-reset approaches. Our findings provide guidance on how experimentalists should design future experiments.
title To reset, or not to reset -- that is the question
topic Quantum Physics
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.00758