Comparison of Two Optimization Methods for a Rydberg Quantum Gate

TL;DR

This paper compares an analytical shortcut-to-adiabaticity method with a numerical optimization approach for implementing high-fidelity quantum gates on Rydberg atoms, highlighting their relative performance and robustness.

Contribution

It provides a comparative analysis of analytical and numerical optimization methods for quantum gate implementation on Rydberg atoms, emphasizing the impact of pulse constraints.

Findings

Numerically optimized gates achieve higher fidelities.

Both methods show robustness against errors.

Pulse constraints significantly affect optimization outcomes.

Abstract

A shortcut-to-adiabaticity is compared with a numerically optimized protocol for implementing a high-fidelity quantum gate on Rydberg atoms. The counterdiabatic method offers an analytical framework for accelerating high-fidelity gates by mimicking the time evolution of a counterdiabatic Hamiltonian using fast-oscillating fields. This approach is contrasted with a numerically optimized gate designed using the Boulder Opal platform. The numerically optimized gate achieves higher fidelities while demonstrating robustness against errors similar to that of the effective counterdiabatic gate. The study serves as an example of the performance of analytic shortcut-to-adiabatic-inspired protocols compared to brute-force numerical optimization techniques for state-of-the-art quantum computing platforms. It stresses the important role played by constraints on the optimized pulses in time and in amplitude that are crucial in determining the quality of the optimization method.