realistic trapped-ion quantum processing for … trapped-ion quantum processing for enhanced...
TRANSCRIPT
999999-1
XYZ 11/7/2011
Realistic Trapped-Ion Quantum Processing for
Enhanced Computation, Simulation, and Sensing: Addressing Challenges to Scaling Up Processor Speed, Size, and Fidelity
John Chiaverini
This work was sponsored by the Department of the Air Force under contract number FA8721-05-C-0002. Opinions, interpretations,
conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the United States Government.
999999-2
XYZ 11/7/2011
Quantum computing: small or different?
• Atoms per bit approaching 1 (~2020?)
– Corollary of Moore’s law gives amazingly reliable exponential decrease in size of bits in a computer
– We will need to do something different with conventional computers when we get to this level
– This is still just making a classical bit, however, but using 1 atom instead of many
R. W. Keyes IBM J. R&D 32 (1988)
CMOS
Pentium IV
Intel Core II
100
2020
999999-3
XYZ 11/7/2011
Quantum computing: small or different?
• Quantum computing, ~1 atom (etc.) per qubit*
– Reason for this is that we need a coherent quantum system capable of
Superposition Entanglement with other
quantum systems
– Quantum computers do not just do “classical computing, but better”
– QC works in a different way, solving some problems exponentially faster than possible classically
– Requirements for QC are not the same as those for Moore’s law continuation
*It will actually be many atoms per (logical) qubit to really work
102
1
10012
1
Michael Nielsen:
“…[Q]uantum computers cannot be
explained in simple concrete terms; if
they could be, quantum computers
could be directly simulated on
conventional computers, and
quantum computing would offer no
advantage over such computers.”
999999-4
XYZ 11/7/2011
Overview
• Trapped ions for quantum processing – Most advanced modality for QIP – Holding tight to a single atom, and the apparatus involved – High-fidelity quantum operations
• Trapped ions v. neutral atoms for quantum applications
• Current challenges for scaling to large-scale processors – Systems need to be smaller to be faster – Anomalous heating of motional modes – Arrays of individual trapped ions – Speeding up high-fidelity operations
• Methods to address these challenges – Low-temperature operation – Trap chip surface quality – Enhanced light collection – RF and MW quantum logic gates
• Outlook
Will be interspersed
999999-5
XYZ 11/7/2011
Current state of the art ion QIP demos
• Entanglement of 14 qubits
• Programmable two-qubit quantum processor
• Repetitive quantum error correction
• Quantum simulation of interacting spin systems
• yN force detection
Hanneke et al. Nature Phys. (2009)
Biercuk et al. Nature Nano. (2010)
Islam et al. Nature Comm. (2011)
Schindler et al. Science (2011)
Monz et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. (2011)
999999-6
XYZ 11/7/2011
Ion quantum-logic clock
• “…Metrology at the 17th decimal place”
• Al+ ion is controlled and read out via quantum logic operations on an auxiliary Be+ ion
• Currently, inaccuracy smaller than 10-17 (comparing 2 Al+ clocks in 2010)
• Also used to measure grav. redshift due to height difference of only 33 cm
Chou et al. Science (2010)
Rosenband et al. Science (2008)
999999-7
XYZ 11/7/2011
Trapping and manipulating individual atomic ions
999999-8
XYZ 11/7/2011
Controllable quantum systems
• Internal quantum states have long lifetimes, coherence
• Quantum gates performed by driving transitions
• Ions coupled through Coulomb interaction
• Share quantized vibration modes in trap
• 2-qubit gates performed by inducing internal state-dependent motion
Ion Paul trap
n=0
n=1
n=2
Ion vibrational mode
Dn |0
|1
t ~ 0.5 to >10 s
t ~ 5 ns
999999-9
XYZ 11/7/2011
Typical setup in the real world
• Current scale is “small-room” sized (1-2 optical tables)
• Most experiments are single-to-few individually addressable ions
• Classical control is typically a few computers plus a few racks of electronics
• Significant room for integration
Lasers
Classical control
Vacuum
Detectors
Feedthroughs
“dc” m-wave, rf
AOMs/
switches
Bulk optics
Fibers
Windows
Laser
stabilization
Ion
Source Trap
Pump
Resonator Trap
rf
999999-10
XYZ 11/7/2011
Keeping ions around
• Vacuum requirements – Ion lifetime typically limited by
background gas collisions – Room temperature UHV
systems – Use only UHV-compatible
materials – After ~1wk bakeout @200-
300C, get to ~10-10 T or less – This can give lifetimes of
several hours to several days – Equipment
St. steel flanges with knife edges
Deformable copper gaskets Bake-able valves or pinch-offs Ion and evaporable getter
pumps Representative UHV system
(MIT LL)
999999-11
XYZ 11/7/2011
Systems can be smaller
• Maybe Even portable!
• Similarly to smaller neutral atoms systems, not a lot is required for basic functionality
– Ion pump – Source of atoms – Optical access for lasers and light collection – Electrical feed-throughs – Magnetic field coils
Cold Quanta, Inc.
• Commercial system for
producing Rb MOT
• ~ 30 cm in longest dimension
Caveat: Does not include lasers!
999999-12
XYZ 11/7/2011
Going cold
• Cryogenic traps – Helps the vacuum
Cryopumping: most gases plate out, rapidly producing low pressures w/o a bake
Larger range of materials can be used – Helps with anomalous motional state
heating (more later)
• He bath cryostats – Trap sits in vacuum space in contact with
LHe bath, 4.2 K (or below if pumped) – High cooling power, relatively quiet
(acoustically and vibrationally) – LHe, and usually LN2 also, must be
transferred every couple of days
• Closed-cycle cryocoolers – Trap attached to cold plate cooled by He
gas cooled in heat-engine cycle (e.g. Gifford-McMahon or Pulse-tube)
– Can operate continuously, no liquid cryogens
– Vibration, acoustic noise can be appreciable
– Cooling power typically lower than bath cryostats
MIT campus group
999999-13
XYZ 11/7/2011
Holding onto ions
• RF traps – Ponderomotive trapping with
rapidly varying quadrupole electric field
– Linear traps use a static electric field in one dimension
• Trapping fields – Need high amplitude RF
voltage (~100V at 10s of MHz) – Static voltage usually a few
volts
• Trap frequencies (linear trap) – Typically several MHz radially – A few MHz axially – Ions line up along RF null line RF RF
Positive ions
999999-14
XYZ 11/7/2011
Surface electrode traps
• Unfold the quadrupole electrodes onto a surface
• RF null above the surface
• Depth/trap frequencies smaller for same applied RF voltage
• Fabrication greatly simplified
• Integration more straightforward
JC et al., QIC 5, 419 (2005)
999999-15
XYZ 11/7/2011
Surface electrode traps in practice
• SETs are being used in many labs
• SETs are the primary (but not sole) format for integration
• Less shielding than standard designs
First NIST SETs
Oxford MIT Campus Seidelin, JC, et al. PRL ‘06
999999-16
XYZ 11/7/2011
Atoms to ions
• Direct production from hot atomic beam
• Atoms are typically several 100’s to 1000 deg C
• Trap electrodes must be shielded
• Ablation also used
• Photo-ionization – Typically two-step
process – Requires 1-2 lasers, or
laser + LED, or pulsed laser, etc.
– Ion-species dependent – Can provide isotope
selectivity
DC current
S
P Neutral atom
structure
999999-17
XYZ 11/7/2011
Getting light to the ions
• Bulk optics – Usual setup has free-space
light for frequency stabilization, switching, frequency shifting, etc.
– Beams in air with long lever arms between mirrors leads to acoustic sensitivity for beam pointing
– Also index of refraction effects
• Fibers – Bring fibers to vacuum
system – Bring fibers into vacuum
system to trap – May need fiber noise
cancellation techniques if narrow linewidth light
• Better idea might be integration of sources and waveguides on-chip Kim et al. (MIT campus) arXiv:1103.5256
Typical optics set up (MIT LL)
999999-18
XYZ 11/7/2011
Switching of beams
• Shutters are typically too slow (ms), but are used when total extinction required
• Typically done with acousto-optic modulators (AOMs) – Acoustic wave in crystal causes deflection of light beam – Can be switched in ~100 ns or less – Requires relatively high RF power (Watts at 100’s of MHz)
• Thermal management problems – Diffraction efficiency is duty-cycle dependent – Switching latency variations if beam pointing changes – Light scatter even when “off” can lead to decoherence (follow
AOM with shutter, but slow) – Water cooling?
AOM heats up
AOM cools down
999999-19
XYZ 11/7/2011
State readout
• Look at photons coming from ion in some detection time
– Set threshold – Ions typically put out >10
MHz rate of photons – These are not all collected
(see following)
• Detectors – CCDs for imaging and array
readout Good QE, but slow Will need larger arrays that
are faster for larger systems
– PMTs for photon counting Very sensitive Somewhat low efficiencies
– APDs? VLPCs? SNSPDs?
Oxford group
Maryland group
999999-20
XYZ 11/7/2011
High-fidelity quantum state manipulation
• Required error rates – Threshold in the
neighborhood of 10-4, maybe
– Should be much lower than this for reasonable resource requirements
• Achieved error rates – Ions are ahead of the
pack – Still a long way to go,
however – Also, somewhat slow
(particularly measurement)
• Algorithmic figure of merit 105-106
– Other modalities <104 or so
Operation Error Time demonstrated for high-fidelity
Preparation ~1x10-4 ~2 us
Single-qubit operation (microwaves)
2x10-5 10 us
Two-qubit op. 7x10-3 50 us
Measurement 1x10-4 150 us (avg)
Demonstrated coherence time: >10 s
999999-21
XYZ 11/7/2011
Cold Neutrals v. Trapped Ions
• Similarities – All atoms/ions are identical – Laser cooling used in both cases to prepare and
readout quantum info. – Both can be trapped “on-chip” – UHV generally required
• Differences – Trapping provided via RF v. laser/magnetic trapping
Strong trapping much easier in ions Only one laser beam needed for cooling bound particle No large magnetic coils needed RF voltage required Lower temperatures in atoms
– Charged particles Strong interaction between ions Lower numbers (Coulomb repulsion)
– Lasers a bit toward blue and UV for ions, technologically a bit harder
– Lifetimes nominally similar, but ions demonstrated somewhat longer due to better trapping
999999-22
XYZ 11/7/2011
+Ze +(Z+1)e
Lasers: wavelengths
• Singly-ionized hydrogenlike species:
– Unscreened (or not-quite-as-well screened) extra proton
– Makes energy somewhat higher than in typical neutral alkalis that are used for ultracold atom work
• For D1 & D2 lines, near-IR goes to blue or UV
• Blu-ray wavelength is close, but not enough screw-ups left
– Early mistakes made ion trappers happy
-(Z-1)e
-1e
-(Z-1)e
-1e
Alkali atom Alkali-earth ion
Lybarger, PhD thesis (2009)
999999-23
XYZ 11/7/2011
Pushing toward useful, large-scale devices
999999-24
XYZ 11/7/2011
Smaller, Faster, but Probably Not Cheaper
• Multi-qubit operation speed limited to motional frequency
• Frequency ~ 1/d2
• So shrink the trap! – Surface traps can scale right down to
micron scale, leading to GHz or higher frequencies
– Lithography still won’t be that hard, and voltages go down
• But there is noise – Johnson noise of the electrodes is not
appreciable – However, anomalous heating has been
seen in all ion trap experiments – Heating scales as ~ 1/d4 (!) – This heating rate leads directly to error
in multi-qubit quantum logic gates – Not a major obstacle now, but… – It is the biggest fundamental obstacle to
large-scale QIP with ions Epstein et al. PRA 76, 033411 (2007)
999999-25
XYZ 11/7/2011
What is it?
• Fluctuating potentials from insulating patches
– Patches are smaller in size than distance from ion to electrode
– Charge moves around on patches – Could be insulating or not-as-conductive
regions: oxides, dirt, fabrication detritus, etc.
• Dipoles of adsorbed atoms – Less than a monolayer of adsorbates can
form reasonable-sized dipole moments – These can fluctuate leading to noise – With multiple levels (i.e. more than 2-level
systems) can reproduce empirical data somewhat
• Varies quite a bit with preparation, but not clear yet
– Presence of atoms from hot vapor (used to load ions) seems to be bad
– Inconsistent results from varying electrode material and preparation
999999-26
XYZ 11/7/2011
Attacking Anomalous Heating
• Cooling electrodes seems to help
– Orders of magnitude reduction in heating rates
– Thermal activation of bound charges
– Superconductors not an improvement on cold metal
Heating is due to surface effects, not bulk
• There is lots of garbage on the surface
– Leftovers from fab – Oxides – Metal atoms from vapor
Deslauriers et al. PRL ’06
~5K points from MIT
Campus group
Surface oxides, organic
contaminants, metal from atomic
vapor used for loading
(Supposedly) ideal electrode metal
999999-27
XYZ 11/7/2011
In-situ Surface Preparation
• Surface oxides, fabrication byproducts, and adsorbates are present
• Surface cleaning in vacuum at low temperature
– Develop ion milling capability to remove surface contaminates
– Trap ions and measure heating rates in just-cleaned trap at low temperature
• NIST, LL groups planning on exploring this
– NIST: room temperature, but with many analysis tools
– LL: low temperature
Ion milling
Surface contaminants
OCI Vacuum
Incorporate into
UHV system
999999-28
XYZ 11/7/2011
Speeding Up Readout
• Current ion readout is very good, but somewhat slow
– 99.99% accuracy in 150 us
– Can be even a bit better and slower, or worse and faster
• The big bottleneck is light collection
– Atom can emit at >10 MHz, but into 4p str
– Only a few % is collected
– Detectors are also not perfect
999999-29
XYZ 11/7/2011
Enhanced collection technologies
• Coupling to photons (and faster measurement) requires better collection
• Schemes – Fibers nearby – Microlenses – Macroscopic reflectors – Microscopic reflectors – Mirrors on the trap
substrate
• Also a bit to be gained by increasing detector efficiency
Shu et al. PRA 81, 042321 (2010)
VanDevender et al.
PRL 105, 023001
(2010)
Herskind et al.
arXiv:1011.5259
(2010)
Noek et al. Opt.
Lett. 35, 2460
(2010)
999999-30
XYZ 11/7/2011
Fresnel Reflector Integration
• Parabolic Fresnel optics – Can be integrated with
surface trap – Some zones identified
with RF to bring about trapping
– Gray tone lithography for definition of zones
– All metal, won’t charge like refractive optics
MIT LL, U. of Washington
Areva Solar
999999-31
XYZ 11/7/2011
Low-Fi?
• Gate fidelity must be improved to “fault-tolerant” levels
– 10-6 to 10-4 error per gate is a ballpark figure
– In terms of resources, better to have even lower error
• Biggest technical errors during quantum logic gates: Laser intensity fluctuations
– Gate performance requires pulse area to be constant
– Intensity noise from several sources Frequency doubling process Beam pointing instability Thermal effects in AOMs for switching
• A fundamental source comes along with fast laser operations
– Spontaneous emission during gate – Incoherence due to decay from virtual
atomic level, rather than coherent absorption and re-emission
– Can be reduced with bigger detuning, but need more power
S1/2
P1/2
P3/2
Virtually excited levels…
Lead to decohering
scattering process
999999-32
XYZ 11/7/2011
Higher Fidelity Operations
• Microwaves for hyperfine qubit rotations
– No spontaneous emission
– Much more stable in power and frequency than optical sources
– Acoustic-sensitive lock not required
– Easy to switch
• Some drawbacks to MW/RF radiation
– Individual addressing? – Generally no ability to
apply a force to ions (gradient comes for free with optical field)
• Solution: Create a gradient on chip!
S1/2
P1/2
P3/2
RF or MW
~20 nm
lopt
lRF
999999-33
XYZ 11/7/2011
Near-field RF and Microwaves
• Gradient coils co-located with trapping structure (possibly in array)
• More robust due to better RF phase coherence
• More scalable due to lower error rate
• Also, ions don’t necessarily need ground state cooling
JC and Lybarger, PRA 77, 022324 (2008)
Ospelkaus et al., PRL 101, 090502 (2008)
999999-34
XYZ 11/7/2011
On-Chip Generated Fields
• Integrate microwave waveguide among trap electrodes
• Quantum logic gates without lasers
– Single qubit gates in 19 ms – Includes sidebands for
cooling – Two qubit gates as well
• Considerations – Must make high gradient in B,
with low overall B – Trap frequency fluctuations – Power consumption can be
large – Crosstalk will require
compensating fields with multiple zones
Ospelkaus et al. (NIST) arXiv:1104.3573
999999-35
XYZ 11/7/2011
Scaling the whole thing up
• Need many ions, all somewhat addressable
• A few ideas – Movable ions
throughout a 1+e dimensional maze-like structure with branches
– 2D array of individually trapped, mostly static, ions
– Medium-scale 1D arrays joined together via photonic interconnects
999999-36
XYZ 11/7/2011
Arrays of traps
• 1D maze-like traps
• Electrostatic movement
• Based on Kielpinski, Monroe, and Wineland suggestion (QCCD)
• Move ions to/from processing zones
• Store in other zones
Leibfried (NIST)
Blakestad et al. (NIST)
999999-37
XYZ 11/7/2011
Surface trap arrays
• To date, similar to arrays of 1D maze structures as in more traditional traps
• Junctions are key difficulty
Sandia
NIST
GTRI
999999-38
XYZ 11/7/2011
Reconfigurable arrays
• 2D arrays without junctions
• Reconfigurable RF – Can move a ions while
always at RF null – Flexible layout – Can bring ions closer than
lattice spacing for gates
• Considerations – More RF signal overhead – Many channels, depending
on pixelation
Kumph et al. (Innsbruck) arXiv:1103.5428
JC and Lybarger, 2009
999999-39
XYZ 11/7/2011
Leave the ions alone
• Photonic interconnects
• Each node has a few qubits
• Entanglement can be generated between nodes
• Gates can be teleported after entanglement is set up
• Recent results 12 minutes to do one entangling op. – Strongly limited by collection efficiency
• So far, getting strong coupling with photons is the big challenge
Chris Monroe, Jungsang Kim, et al.
999999-40
XYZ 11/7/2011
Booting up
• For large-scale QIP (QC, simulation, or high SNR quantum sensing), large arrays will be needed
• Ion loss rates at UHV pressures can be appreciable with many 1000’s of ions
• Typical ion trap loading rates are 1/s
– This is due to trapping low-velocity tail of 400 – 1000 C thermal distribution
– Faster loading is required
• Use a pre-cooled source – Lower velocities – Higher efficiencies
Typical Loading
Required Loading
999999-41
XYZ 11/7/2011
Start with cold atoms
• Start with cold neutral atom source
• Avoids contamination of trap surface
• Extra level of isotope selectivity
• More efficient trapping
• Much faster loading rates possible – Ions from MOT: faster by orders
of magnitude (Vuletic/Chuang)
• Need an additional laser for MOT
e-
atom
ion
MOT
ion chip
Collect atoms in
MOT
Push atom(s)
to trap region
with resonant
beam
Photoionize atom
above surface trap
Magneto-Optical Trap SET for ions
MIT LL
999999-42
XYZ 11/7/2011
• Sr MOT achieved – Cooled and trapped 105 to
106 atoms – T ~ 7 mK – Atoms successfully
pushed to trap (60 mm away)
– Next, ionize them there
MOT atoms
Untrapped
atom
fluorescence
MOT achieved, atoms pushed
w0 ~ 2 mm
999999-43
XYZ 11/7/2011
Outlook: One medium-term vision
• Array loaded from pre-cooled neutral source
– Either directly or via a holding zone
• Logic using MW – Array has interspersed CPWG
for signal delivery – Ions moved as necessary with
reconfigurable electrodes
• Ions read out with integrated collection
– Either relay optics or built-in photodetection
• For simulation and sensing, most movement can be eliminated, many operations done in parallel
• Substrate may need to be cleaned in vacuum, cryogenics may be required
• There are many routes, however!
Pre-cooled
neutrals ionized
to load trap array
Embedded MW
electrodes used
for gates, ions
moved as
necessary
Integrated optics
collect light from
ion for
measurement
999999-44
XYZ 11/7/2011
END
• MIT Lincoln Lab team – Jeremy Sage – Andrew (Jamie) Kerman – JC
• Collaborators – Warren Lybarger (Los
Alamos National Lab, Aerospace Corp.)
– Harvard
• Funding – Lincoln Lab internal funds
for capability development