Comparing and correcting robustness metrics for quantum optimal control
Fuente:
arXiv
Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2026
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866911520713080832 |
|---|---|
| author | Kamen, Andrew T. Fine, Samuel Bhattacharyya, Bikrant Chong, Frederic T. Goldschmidt, Andy J. |
| author_facet | Kamen, Andrew T. Fine, Samuel Bhattacharyya, Bikrant Chong, Frederic T. Goldschmidt, Andy J. |
| contents | Control pulses that nominally optimize fidelity are sensitive to routine hardware drift and modeling errors. Robust quantum optimal control seeks error-insensitive control pulses that maintain fidelity thresholds and obey hardware constraints. Distinct numerical approximations to the first-order error susceptibility include adjoint end-point and toggling-frame approaches. Although theoretically equivalent, we provide a novel, systematic study demonstrating important numerical differences between these two approaches. We also introduce a critical discretization correction to the widely-used toggling-frame robustness estimator, measurably improving its estimate of first-order error susceptibility. We accomplish our study by positioning robustness as a first-class objective within direct, constrained optimal control. Our approach uniquely handles control and fidelity constraints while cleanly isolating robustness for dedicated optimization. In both single- and two-qubit examples under realistic constraints, our approach provides an analytic edge for obtaining precise, physics-informed robustness. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_10349 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Comparing and correcting robustness metrics for quantum optimal control Kamen, Andrew T. Fine, Samuel Bhattacharyya, Bikrant Chong, Frederic T. Goldschmidt, Andy J. Quantum Physics Control pulses that nominally optimize fidelity are sensitive to routine hardware drift and modeling errors. Robust quantum optimal control seeks error-insensitive control pulses that maintain fidelity thresholds and obey hardware constraints. Distinct numerical approximations to the first-order error susceptibility include adjoint end-point and toggling-frame approaches. Although theoretically equivalent, we provide a novel, systematic study demonstrating important numerical differences between these two approaches. We also introduce a critical discretization correction to the widely-used toggling-frame robustness estimator, measurably improving its estimate of first-order error susceptibility. We accomplish our study by positioning robustness as a first-class objective within direct, constrained optimal control. Our approach uniquely handles control and fidelity constraints while cleanly isolating robustness for dedicated optimization. In both single- and two-qubit examples under realistic constraints, our approach provides an analytic edge for obtaining precise, physics-informed robustness. |
| title | Comparing and correcting robustness metrics for quantum optimal control |
| topic | Quantum Physics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10349 |