𝒊𝑁𝑆𝐼𝐺𝐻𝑇 𝒊ℏ
  • Home
  • Qubit Physics
    • Superconducting Qubits (Elementary)
    • Superconducting Qubits (Advanced)
    • Semiconductor Spin Qubits
    • The Architecture of SC
      Quantum Computers (2026 Fall)
  • Hardware
  • Quantum Industries
  • Workshop Note
    • 2026 Academia Sinica SCQC Winter Workshop
  • Consultance
    • Taiwan Market Outreach Services
    • About Us
  • 中文版

Superconducting Quantum Computer Architecture

  1. Home
  2. PHYS598500
← Previous
QH-2026F v5 · 16-Week Overview
Week 1 Manual Slides · Computation Is Physical | QH-2026F v5
Week 2 Manual Slides v41 · Hardware, Superconductivity, and Josephson Anharmonicity | QH-2026F v5
Week 3 Manual Slides · Tunability and the C-Shunted Transmon | QH-2026F v5
Week 4 Manual Slides · Noise, Fluxonium, and Protected-Qubit Design | QH-2026F v5
𝒊𝑁𝑆𝐼𝐺𝐻𝑇 𝒊ℏ

Exploring the Quantum Technology Together.

𝐾𝐸𝐸𝑃 𝐼𝑁 𝑇𝑂𝑈𝐶𝐻

  • info@insight-ihbar.com

𝒊𝑁𝑆𝐼𝐺𝐻𝑇 𝒊ℏ

All Rights Reserved

PHYS598500 · Week 4 · T2-4

Noise, Fluxonium, and Protected-Qubit Design

Operators, matrix elements, and Hamiltonian engineering

Josephson junction

Josephson junction As a Nonlinear Inductor

Wavefunctions from two superconductors overlap across a Josephson junction barrier
Portrait of Brian Josephson
Brian Josephson
Predicted phase-driven supercurrent tunneling in 1962.
\[I=I_c\sin\varphi\]
\[\dot\varphi=\frac{2eV}{\hbar}\]
\[ \begin{aligned} L_J(\varphi) =\frac{\Phi_0}{2\pi I_c\cos\varphi} \end{aligned} \]

Source and image: HyperPhysics, “Josephson Junction”.

Symmetric SQUID · step 1 of 2

The loop fixes the relative junction phase

A condensate phase winding becomes a two-junction SQUID loop threaded by magnetic flux Phi B




\[ \Phi_0 \equiv\frac{h}{2e}, \qquad \frac{2e}{\hbar}=\frac{2\pi}{\Phi_0}, \qquad \Delta\theta_2=\Delta\theta_1 -2\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}+2\pi N \]

Symmetric SQUID · step 2 of 2

SQUID

\[ I=I_1+I_2 =I_c\sin\Delta\theta_1+I_c\sin\Delta\theta_2 \]
Current through a symmetric SQUID formed by two Josephson junction branches

Insert the loop constraint

\[ \begin{aligned} I&=I_c\!\left[ \sin\Delta\theta_1 +\sin\!\left(\Delta\theta_1-2\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}+2\pi N\right) \right] =I_c\!\left[ \sin\Delta\theta_1 +\sin\!\left(\Delta\theta_1-2\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}\right) \right] \end{aligned} \]

Trigonometric identity

\[ \begin{gathered} \sin a+\sin b =2\cos\!\left(\frac{a-b}{2}\right) \sin\!\left(\frac{a+b}{2}\right) \quad \to \quad I= \underbrace{2I_c\cos\!\left(\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}\right)}_{\equiv I_{SQUID}\left(\Phi_B \right)} \sin\!\underbrace{\left(\Delta\theta_1-\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}\right)}_{\equiv \varphi} =I_{SQUID}\left(\Phi_B \right)\, \sin \varphi \end{gathered} \]

Josephson junction

\[ \begin{aligned} I&=I_c\sin\varphi,\quad L_J(\varphi) =\frac{\Phi_0}{2\pi I_c\cos\varphi} \end{aligned} \]

SQUID

\[ \begin{aligned} I&=I_{\rm SQUID}(\Phi_B)\sin\varphi,\quad L_J(\Phi_B,\varphi) =\frac{\Phi_0}{2\pi I_{\rm SQUID}(\Phi_B)\cos\varphi} \end{aligned} \]

SQUID · asymmetric

Asymmetric SQUID

Symmetric and asymmetric split-transmon circuits with their transition frequencies versus external flux
Krantz et al., Applied Physics Reviews 6, 021318 (2019), Fig. 2(a–d). DOI
\[ \begin{aligned} I&=I_{\rm SQUID}(\Phi_B)\sin\varphi,\\[-1pt] L_{SQUID}(\Phi_B,\varphi) &=\frac{\Phi_0}{2\pi \cdot 2I_c\cos\!\left(\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}\right)\cdot\cos\varphi} \end{aligned} \]

Frequency follows the inductance

\[ \omega=\frac{1}{\sqrt{L_{\rm SQUID}\, C}} \propto\sqrt{\cos\!\left(\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}\right)} \]

Asymmetric junctions

\[ \begin{gathered} I_1=I_c,\qquad I_2=\gamma I_c,\\[2pt] I=I_1\sin\Delta\theta_1 +\gamma I_1\sin\!\left( \Delta\theta_1-2\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0} \right),\\[3pt] I_{\rm SQUID}(\Phi_B) =I_c\sqrt{(1-\gamma)^2 +4\gamma\cos^2\!\left(\pi\frac{\Phi_B}{\Phi_0}\right)} \end{gathered} \]

Superconducting-qubit hardware layouts

Flux-tunable transmon layout with labelled capacitances and scanning electron micrographs of its Josephson junction
3 · Flux-tunable qubit capacitances and junction F. Swiadek, Readout of Superconducting Qubits and Design of Quantum Processing Units (2025), Fig. 2.14(a–c)
Scanning electron micrograph of a seven-port starmon with four coupling buses, readout resonator, microwave drive and flux-bias line
4 · Seven-port starmon Versluis et al., Phys. Rev. Applied 8, 034021 (2017), Fig. 8(a)

Double-angle shadow evaporation (Dolan technique)

Six-panel schematic of Dolan-bridge shadow evaporation: electron-beam writing of a PMMA over PMMA/MAA bilayer on a substrate, development leaving an undercut and a suspended bridge, first angled aluminium evaporation, oxidation, second angled evaporation from the opposite side, and lift-off leaving an Al/AlOx/Al junction

Y.-L. Wu et al., Chin. Phys. B 22, 060309 (2013), Fig. 2. DOI

Annotated IBM five-qubit processor
Enlarged annotated qubit cell
Transmon circuit and anharmonic energy spectrum
Josephson junction structure with a nanometre insulating barrier
False-color junction micrograph
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/An-image-of-IBMs-five-qubit-processor-with-its-main-elements-highlighted-including-the_fig4_358153899 · https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pB87H3_F_c · https://www.anl.gov/article/resurrecting-niobium-for-quantum-science · Ref: 10.1557/mrs.2013.229 · https://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/13553/how-quantum-computers-work
Four-panel micrograph of an Al/AlOx/Al Josephson junction: chip-level overview, junction close-up, and a cross-sectional TEM showing Pt cap, C cap, Top-Al, AlOx barrier, Bottom Al and Si substrate
Sources: Al/AlOx/Al TEM, DOI: 10.1557/mrs.2013.229 · Electronics360 overview

Noise

Relaxation and dephasing

\[ \Gamma_2=\tfrac12\,\Gamma_1+\Gamma_\varphi \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad \frac{1}{T_2}=\frac{1}{2T_1}+\frac{1}{T_\varphi} \]
Four Bloch spheres: the Bloch sphere with its longitudinal and transverse axes, longitudinal relaxation with excitation and relaxation rates, pure dephasing in the equatorial plane, and transverse relaxation combining both
Energy-relaxation measurement: qubit population decaying from the excited to the ground state after an X pi pulse and a delay tau, with an exponential fit T1 = 85 microseconds
Animation: a Bloch vector under Ramsey sequences of two pulses separated by five different delays

P. Krantz et al., Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021318 (2019), Figs. 4 and 5(a). DOI

Where the fluctuators sit

TLS defects, adsorbates, residues, and contamination near Josephson junctions and circuit surfaces: a transmon electrode and junction, defects in the amorphous AlOx barrier, and surface defects on the electrode and substrate

Left: J. Lisenfeld et al., npj Quantum Inf. 5, 105 (2019), DOI. Right: W. D. Oliver and P. B. Welander, MRS Bull. 38, 816 (2013), DOI.

Schematic illustration of decoherence sources in superconducting qubits: environment circuit modes, photons, paramagnetic and nuclear spins, magnetic-field noise, trapped vortices, charge fluctuations, charge and Josephson-energy fluctuations in the junction, and quasiparticle tunnelling

Inside a 2 nm AlOx barrier

Microscopic material defects in a Josephson-junction barrier: a flux-qubit loop with three junctions, a junction cross-section, and trapped charge, hydrogen impurities, tunnelling atoms and dangling bonds in the roughly 2 nm insulator

S. Saito, NTT Technical Review 22(11), 7 (2024). DOI

A TLS is a double well

A simple double-well TLS model with asymmetry epsilon and tunnelling Delta, and a qubit circuit coupled with strength g to a coherent TLS inside an incoherent TLS bath

I. Siddiqi, Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 875 (2021). DOI

Tuning the qubit through a TLS

A defect two-level system, the qubit transition tuned with flux showing an avoided crossing at the defect energy, and a peak in the qubit relaxation rate 1/T1 at that energy

P. V. Klimov et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 090502 (2018). DOI

Transmon with an epitaxial tunnel junction

Qubit spectroscopy against flux bias between 6.8 and 7.3 GHz with arrows marking avoided level crossings, an upper inset zooming on the splitting near 7.27 GHz, and a lower inset of vacuum Rabi oscillations

M. P. Weides et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 99, 262502 (2011), Fig. 2. DOI · arXiv:1111.5083

\(T_1\) drifts in frequency and in time

Spectrally and temporally resolved T1 over 20 hours between 5.4 and 5.8 GHz, with line cuts 100 MHz and 15 minutes apart and the corresponding T1 distributions
Red streaks: short \(T_1\), a TLS near resonance. They wander over hours, so the best operating frequency moves.

P. V. Klimov et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 090502 (2018). DOI

An epitaxial barrier removes most TLS

Four RHEED images, a to d, above sketches of the layer stack with rhenium, aluminium and oxygen atoms
Fig. 1 · RHEED during growth, Re / Al / O
Micrograph of a phase qubit with its dc SQUID and bias coil, a cross-section of the Re / Al2O3 / Al tunnel junction, and the measurement circuit at 25 mK
Fig. 2 · Phase qubit with a Re / Al2O3 / Al junction
Qubit spectroscopy against bias current: many avoided crossings for an amorphous AlOx barrier, far fewer for a single-crystal Al2O3 barrier, with a Rabi-oscillation inset
Fig. 3 · (a) amorphous AlOx · (b) crystalline Al2O3

S. Oh et al., Phys. Rev. B 74, 100502(R) (2006): about 80% fewer TLS splittings; the rest is attributed to the interfaces. DOI

Quasiparticle Burst

Qubit array chip photo and the flip-chip stack (qubit chip, vacuum gap, carrier chip, copper box, muon detectors MDA and MDB) with a muon and a gamma ray passing through, phonons breaking Cooper pairs into quasiparticles
Normalized T1 of many qubits against injection power: flat up to about 20 dBm, then dropping sharply; inset energy-relaxation traces with T1 = 10.6 us and 6.8 us

Noise sources

Materials, nonequilibrium excitations, and decoherence pathways in superconducting qubits: a qubit chip, amorphous dielectrics, non-equilibrium excitations, 1/f noise sources, and the pure-dephasing and longitudinal-relaxation pathways
Energy relaxation channels
TLS absorption quasiparticle tunnelling Purcell decay phonons · package modes surface dielectric loss
Phase decoherence channels
flux noise charge noise TLS frequency drift critical-current noise residual-photon ac Stark shift \(1/f\) noise

I. Siddiqi, Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 875 (2021). DOI

Where do errors enter the Hamiltonian?

Error channels · step 1 of 6

Every knob is also a noise channel

\[ \hat{\mathcal H}_0=\begin{pmatrix}E_0 & 0\\ 0 & E_1\end{pmatrix} =\frac{E_0+E_1}{2}\,\mathbb I-\frac{\hbar\omega_{01}}{2}\,\sigma_z \]
\[ \hat{\mathcal H}_0=-\frac{\hbar\omega_{01}}{2}\,\sigma_z \]

The Hamiltonian depends on biases \(\lambda=\{n_g,\Phi,E_J,\ldots\}\), and each one fluctuates:

\[ \lambda(t)=\lambda_0+\delta\lambda(t) \] \[ \hat{\mathcal H}(\lambda_0+\delta\lambda) =\underbrace{\hat{\mathcal H}(\lambda_0)}_{\hat{\mathcal H}_0} +\underbrace{\hat O_\lambda\,\delta\lambda(t)}_{\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}(t)} +O\!\left(\delta\lambda^2\right), \qquad \hat O_\lambda\equiv\left.\frac{\partial\hat{\mathcal H}}{\partial\lambda}\right|_{\lambda_0} \] \[ \hat{\mathcal H}_0=-\frac{\hbar\omega_{01}}{2}\,\sigma_z, \qquad O_{ij}\equiv\langle i|\hat O_\lambda|j\rangle, \qquad O_{10}=O_{01}^{*} \] \[ \Delta\hat{\mathcal H}(t) =\delta\lambda(t)\begin{pmatrix}O_{00}&O;_{01}\\O_{10}&O;_{11}\end{pmatrix} =\delta\lambda(t)\left[\frac{O_{00}+O_{11}}{2}\,\mathbb I -\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{2}\,\sigma_z +\frac{O_{10}+O_{01}}{2}\,\sigma_x+\frac{O_{10}-O_{01}}{2i}\,\sigma_y\right] \] \[ =\underbrace{-\frac{\hbar}{2}\,\delta\omega_{01}(t)\,\sigma_z}_{\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_\parallel\ \text{(longitudinal)}} +\underbrace{\delta\lambda(t)\left(\frac{O_{10}+O_{01}}{2}\,\sigma_x+\frac{O_{10}-O_{01}}{2i}\,\sigma_y\right)}_{\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_\perp\ \text{(transverse)}} \]
\[ \delta\omega_{01}(t)\equiv\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{\hbar}\,\delta\lambda(t) \]

The \(\mathbb I\) term moves both levels together, a global phase, and is dropped.

Noise chain · step 4 of 13

Longitudinal noise moves the frequency

\[ \delta\omega_{01}(t)\equiv\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{\hbar}\,\delta\lambda(t) \]
\[ \Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_\parallel=-\frac{\hbar}{2}\,\delta\omega_{01}(t)\,\sigma_z \] \[ \hat{\mathcal H}_0+\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_\parallel=-\frac{\hbar}{2}\left[\omega_{01}+\delta\omega_{01}(t)\right]\sigma_z \] \[ \langle0|\hat{\mathcal H}_0+\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_\parallel|1\rangle=0\quad\Longrightarrow\quad|0\rangle\nleftrightarrow|1\rangle \] \[ \phi(t)=\int_0^t\left[\omega_{01}+\delta\omega_{01}(t')\right]dt' \]
\[ \text{random relative phase}\quad\Longrightarrow\quad\text{pure dephasing} \]
Bloch sphere with longitudinal noise along z: the Bloch vector on the equator diffuses back and forth around the z axis, pure dephasing at rate Gamma phi
P. Krantz et al., Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021318 (2019), Fig. 4(c). DOI

Noise chain

Why low-frequency noise is mostly \(\sigma_z\)

One low-frequency component of the noise (\(O_{01}\) real):

\[ \delta\lambda(t)=\delta\lambda_0\sin\omega_L t,\qquad \omega_L\ll\omega_{01} \] \[ \Delta\hat{\mathcal H}(t)=\hat O_\lambda\,\delta\lambda_0\sin\omega_L t =\delta\lambda_0\sin\omega_L t\left[-\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{2}\,\sigma_z+O_{01}\,\sigma_x\right] \]

Interaction picture, \(\hat U=e^{-i\hat{\mathcal H}_0t/\hbar}\):

\[ \sigma_z\ \to\ \hat U^\dagger\sigma_z\hat U=\sigma_z \] \[ \sigma_x\ \to\ \hat U^\dagger\sigma_x\hat U=\sigma_x\cos\omega_{01}t+\sigma_y\sin\omega_{01}t \] \[ \Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_I(t)=\delta\lambda_0\sin\omega_L t\left[-\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{2}\,\sigma_z +O_{01}\left(\sigma_x\cos\omega_{01}t+\sigma_y\sin\omega_{01}t\right)\right] \] \[ =-\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{2}\,\delta\lambda_0\sin\omega_L t\;\sigma_z +\frac{O_{01}\,\delta\lambda_0}{2}\Big[\sigma_x\big(\sin(\omega_{01}+\omega_L)t-\sin(\omega_{01}-\omega_L)t\big) +\sigma_y\big(\cos(\omega_{01}-\omega_L)t-\cos(\omega_{01}+\omega_L)t\big)\Big] \] \[ \sigma_x,\ \sigma_y:\ \ e^{\pm i(\omega_{01}-\omega_L)t},\ \ e^{\pm i(\omega_{01}+\omega_L)t}\ \ \text{fast} \qquad\qquad \sigma_z:\ \ \sin\omega_L t\ \ \text{slow} \]
\[ \overset{\text{RWA}}{\Longrightarrow}\quad \Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_I(t)\simeq-\frac{\hbar}{2}\,\delta\omega_{01}(t)\,\sigma_z, \qquad \delta\omega_{01}(t)=\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{\hbar}\,\delta\lambda(t) \]

A complex \(O_{01}\) only rotates the \(x\)–\(y\) axes. \(\sigma_x,\sigma_y\) survive only for noise near \(\omega_{01}\), i.e. \(S_\lambda(\omega_{01})\): relaxation, next page.

Relaxation · step 1 of 5

Fermi's golden rule

Start in \(|1\rangle\) and let the transverse part act. In the interaction picture:

\[ \Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_I(t)=e^{i\hat{\mathcal H}_0t/\hbar}\,\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}(t)\,e^{-i\hat{\mathcal H}_0t/\hbar} \] \[ i\hbar\,\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\hat U_I(t,0)=\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_I(t)\,\hat U_I(t,0) \]

To first order in \(\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}\):

\[ \hat U_I(t,0)=\mathcal T\exp\!\left[-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_0^t\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_I(t')\,dt'\right] \] \[ \simeq\mathbb I-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_0^t\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}_I(t')\,dt' \]

so the amplitude is a Fourier component of the noise:

\[ \begin{aligned} \langle0|\hat U_I(t,0)|1\rangle &\simeq-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_0^t e^{-i\omega_{01}t'}\langle0|\Delta\hat{\mathcal H}(t')|1\rangle\,dt'\\ &=-\frac{i}{\hbar}\,O_{01}\int_0^t\delta\lambda(t')\,e^{-i\omega_{01}t'}\,dt' \end{aligned} \]

The probability is a double integral over the noise correlation:

\[ P_{1\to0}(t)=\left|\langle0|\hat U_I(t,0)|1\rangle\right|^2 \] \[ =\frac{\left|O_{01}\right|^2}{\hbar^2}\int_0^t\!\!\int_0^t \left\langle\delta\lambda(t'')\delta\lambda(t')\right\rangle e^{-i\omega_{01}\left(t'-t''\right)}dt'dt'' \]

Stationary noise depends only on \(\tau=t'-t''\), so one integral gives a factor \(t\):

\[ P_{1\to0}(t)=\frac{\left|O_{01}\right|^2}{\hbar^2}\;t\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \left\langle\delta\lambda(0)\delta\lambda(\tau)\right\rangle e^{-i\omega_{01}\tau}d\tau \]
\[ \Gamma_{1\to0}=\frac{\left|\left\langle0\left|\hat{O}_\lambda\right|1\right\rangle\right|^2}{\hbar^2}\,S_\lambda(\omega_{01}) \]

Error channels · step 2 of 6

The coupling operators of this circuit

Differentiate \(\hat{\mathcal{H}}=4E_C\left(\hat{n}-n_g\right)^2-E_{J,\mathrm{eff}}(\Phi)\cos\hat{\varphi}\) once for each knob:

\[\hat{O}_{n_g}=\frac{\partial\hat{\mathcal{H}}}{\partial n_g}=-8E_C\left(\hat{n}-n_g\right)\]
\[\hat{O}_\Phi=\frac{\partial\hat{\mathcal{H}}}{\partial\Phi}=-\frac{dE_{J,\mathrm{eff}}}{d\Phi}\cos\hat{\varphi}\]
\[\hat{O}_{E_J}=\frac{\partial\hat{\mathcal{H}}}{\partial E_J}=-\cos\hat{\varphi}\]
\[\hat{O}_{V}\propto\hat{n}\quad\text{(any capacitive port)}\]
\[ \text{charge-like knobs}\ \to\ \hat{n}, \qquad \text{junction-like knobs}\ \to\ \cos\hat{\varphi} \]

Two operators cover the whole list, and we already know both: \(\hat{n}\) drives the qubit, \(\cos\hat{\varphi}\) is the Josephson term itself.

Suppression

Sweet spot, small overlap, selection rule

\[ \hat{O}_\lambda\equiv \frac{\partial \hat{\mathcal H}}{\partial \lambda} \qquad\qquad \underbrace{\frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\lambda}=\frac{\left\langle1\left|\hat{O}_\lambda\right|1\right\rangle-\left\langle0\left|\hat{O}_\lambda\right|0\right\rangle}{\hbar}}_{T_\varphi} \qquad\qquad \underbrace{\Gamma_1=\frac{\left|\left\langle0\left|\hat{O}_\lambda\right|1\right\rangle\right|^2}{\hbar^2}\,S_\lambda(\omega_{01})}_{T_1} \]

1 · Sweet spot: \(\partial\omega_{01}/\partial\lambda=0\)

\[ \frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\lambda}=\frac{O_{11}-O_{00}}{\hbar}=0 \] \[ \delta\omega_{01}\simeq\frac12\,\frac{\partial^2\omega_{01}}{\partial\lambda^2}\,\delta\lambda^2 \]
\[ \Gamma_\varphi^{(1)}=0 \]
only at that bias
\(n_g=\tfrac12\), \(\Phi=0,\ \Phi_0/2\)

2 · Small overlap: far apart

\[ \psi_0,\ \psi_1\ \text{far apart} \] \[ \Longrightarrow\ d_{01}=\langle0|\hat O_\lambda|1\rangle\approx0 \] \[ \Gamma_1\propto|d_{01}|^2\to0 \]
\(T_1\) · never exactly zero · at every bias
fluxonium 2018

3 · Selection rule: odd × even = 0

\[ U(x)=U(-x)\ \Longrightarrow\ [\hat{\mathcal H},\hat P]=0 \] \[ \Longrightarrow\ \psi_0(x)\ \text{even},\ \ \psi_1(x)\ \text{odd} \] \[ \langle0|\cos\hat x|1\rangle=\int\underbrace{\psi_0}_{\rm even}\,\underbrace{\cos x}_{\rm even}\,\underbrace{\psi_1}_{\rm odd}\,dx=0 \] \[ \langle k|\hat x|k\rangle=\int\underbrace{x}_{\rm odd}\,\underbrace{\psi_k^2}_{\rm even}\,dx=0 \]
even noise \((\cos x)\): no \(T_1\) · odd noise \((x)\): no first-order \(T_\varphi\)
fluxonium at \(\phi_{\rm ext}=\pi\), \(x=\phi-\pi\)

What does a superinductor add?

Fluxonium as a physical circuit

Fluxonium device micrograph with circuit diagram showing a small junction, capacitor, superinductor, and external flux
Manucharyan et al. (2009)
3D rendering of a fluxonium: a small junction shunted by a long array of larger junctions, coupled to two 50 ohm lines, with close-ups of the small junction and the array junctions
https://arxiv.org/pdf/0906.0831
Circuit of a loop: one small junction with phase theta 0 and E_J of order E_C, closed by an array of N junctions with E_J much larger than E_C and phases theta 1 to theta N, threaded by external flux
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.5747

Put \(N\) identical junctions in series. With no phase slips, a total phase \(\Theta\) divides evenly:

\[ \theta_j=\frac{\Theta}{N},\qquad U=-\sum_{j=1}^{N}E_{J,a}\cos\theta_j=-NE_{J,a}\cos\frac{\Theta}{N} \]

Each junction sits near the bottom of its own cosine, so expand:

\[ -NE_{J,a}\cos\frac{\Theta}{N}\approx-NE_{J,a}+\frac{E_{J,a}}{2N}\Theta^2 \]
\[ \frac{1}{2}E_L\Theta^2=\frac{E_{J,a}}{2N}\Theta^2 \qquad\Longrightarrow\qquad E_L=\frac{E_{J,a}}{N} \]

Each junction is still nonlinear; sharing the phase between \(N\) of them makes the chain linear to order \(\Theta^2/N^2\).

Transmon versus fluxonium: the transmon cosine potential with its levels and the fluxonium multi-well potential near half flux, with qubit frequency 4 to 8 GHz versus 10 MHz to 8 GHz, anharmonicity about 100 MHz versus about 1 GHz, and a simple versus rich transition spectrum
Circuit diagrams: a transmon as a capacitor in parallel with a Josephson junction, and a fluxonium as a capacitor, a junction and a junction-array superinductor threaded by flux Phi B
https://phys.ncts.ntu.edu.tw/uploads/asset/data/63500fbc1d41c88b36c70d54/220826-Yen-Hsiang_Lin.pdf
Four-step schematic of double-angle shadow evaporation of a Josephson-junction array under a row of suspended resist bridges: first angled deposition, oxidation of the islands, second angled deposition from the opposite side, and the finished chain of overlapping junctions

Fluxonium potential

\[ U(\phi)=-E_J\cos\left(\phi-\phi_{\rm ext}\right)+\frac{1}{2}E_L\phi^2 \]
\(E_J\)
\(E_L\)
\(E_J+E_L\)

L. B. Nguyen et al., Phys. Rev. X 9, 041041 (2019), Eq. (1); start values = device A, \(E_J=3\), \(E_L=1\) GHz (Table I). DOI

2018 PRL

Title and authors of the 2018 Physical Review Letters paper Demonstration of Protection of a Superconducting Qubit from Energy Decay

Lin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 150503 (2018).

One atom · forbidden and allowed transitions

Lin 2018 Figure 1 showing the double-loop fluxonium device, circuit, double-well states, and fluxon and plasmon transitions
\[ d_{01}=\langle0|\hat O_\lambda|1\rangle\approx\langle\psi_L|\hat O_\lambda|\psi_R\rangle\ \longrightarrow\ 0 \]

different wells · exponentially small · forbidden

\[ |0\rangle\to|2\rangle,\ |1\rangle\to|3\rangle:\quad \langle0|\hat\phi|2\rangle,\ \langle1|\hat\phi|3\rangle=\mathcal O(1) \]

same well (plasmon) · allowed

Lin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 150503 (2018), Fig. 1.

2018 · \(T_1\) long, \(T_2\) short

\[ \Gamma_2=\tfrac12\,\Gamma_1+\Gamma_\varphi \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad \frac{1}{T_2}=\frac{1}{2T_1}+\frac{1}{T_\varphi} \]
Lin 2018 Fig. 2: transmission against coil current and tone frequency with fits, a left inset enlarging the smallest fluxon-plasmon splitting and a right inset of the splittings against the square root of E_J
Lin 2018 Fig. 3(a): T1 of the 0-1 transition and its frequency against coil current, rising from about 10 us to above 1 ms, with the measured and calculated dispersive shift below
\[ \varepsilon\neq0\ \Longrightarrow\ \frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\Phi}\neq0 \ \Longrightarrow\ \delta\omega_{01}(t)\simeq\frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\Phi}\,\delta\Phi(t) \ \Longrightarrow\ T_1>2\ {\rm ms},\qquad T_2\approx4\ \mu{\rm s} \]

Lin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 150503 (2018), Figs. 2 and 3(a).

2019 PRX

Title and authors of the 2019 Physical Review X paper High-Coherence Fluxonium Qubit

Half flux · a tunnelling doublet

Nguyen 2019 Figure 1 showing the fluxonium device, circuit, junction array, and wavefunctions at zero and half flux
\[ |0\rangle\simeq\frac{|L\rangle+|R\rangle}{\sqrt2},\qquad |1\rangle\simeq\frac{|L\rangle-|R\rangle}{\sqrt2} \]
\[ \hbar\omega_{01}=\Delta_{\rm tunnel},\qquad \frac{\omega_{01}}{2\pi}\approx0.17\text{–}0.83\ {\rm GHz} \]

not a well offset · transmon: 4–8 GHz

\[ |2\rangle,|3\rangle\ \text{far}\ \Longrightarrow\ \omega_{12}\gg\omega_{01} \]

large anharmonicity

Nguyen et al., Phys. Rev. X 9, 041041 (2019), Fig. 1.

Why the sweet spot removes dephasing

Nguyen 2019 Figure 4a showing T2 increasing sharply near the half-flux sweet spot while the qubit frequency reaches a minimum
\[ \left.\frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\Phi}\right|_{\Phi_0/2}=0 \ \Longrightarrow\ \delta\omega_{01}\simeq\frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\Phi}\,\delta\Phi=0 \]

first-order flux noise no longer moves the qubit

\[ T_2:\ 3\text{–}6\ \mu{\rm s}\ \longrightarrow\ 100\ \mu{\rm s} \]

Gaussian echo (1/f flux noise) → exponential

Why \(T_1\) is also long in 2019
\[ \text{2018: }\ d_{01}=\langle0|\hat O_\lambda|1\rangle\to0 \qquad\qquad \text{2019: }\ \left|\langle0|\hat\phi|1\rangle\right|\approx\pi \]

Not a small phase matrix element: a low frequency

\[ \hat H_C=4E_C\hat n^2 \] \[ \dot{\hat\phi}=\frac{i}{\hbar}\left[\hat H,\hat\phi\right]=\frac{8E_C}{\hbar}\,\hat n \]
\[ \left|\langle0|\hat n|1\rangle\right|=\frac{\hbar\omega_{01}}{8E_C}\,\left|\langle0|\hat\phi|1\rangle\right| \]
\[ \phi_{01}\sim\pi,\quad\omega_{01}\to0\ \Longrightarrow\ n_{01}\to0 \]
\[ \text{small electric dipole}\ \Longrightarrow\ \text{weak dielectric loss} \]

Nguyen et al., Phys. Rev. X 9, 041041 (2019), Fig. 4(a).

2018 PRL vs 2019 PRX

2018 PRL2019 PRX
Wellsunequal double wellsymmetric double well
Eigenstates\(\psi_0\approx\psi_L,\ \psi_1\approx\psi_R\)\((|L\rangle\pm|R\rangle)/\sqrt2\)
Transverse matrix element\(d_{01}=\langle0|\hat O_\lambda|1\rangle\approx\langle\psi_L|\hat O_\lambda|\psi_R\rangle\to0\)\(\left|\langle0|\hat\phi|1\rangle\right|\approx\pi\)
\(T_1\) mechanismforbidden transitionlow \(\omega_{01}\), \(\left|\langle0|\hat n|1\rangle\right|=\frac{\hbar\omega_{01}}{8E_C}\,\left|\langle0|\hat\phi|1\rangle\right|\)
Flux dephasingstrong, \(\frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\Phi}\neq0\)zero at first order, \(\frac{\partial\omega_{01}}{\partial\Phi}=0\)
Main goalprotect against energy decayhigh overall coherence

Lin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 150503 (2018); Nguyen et al., Phys. Rev. X 9, 041041 (2019).

PHYS598500 · Week 4

Thank you

Syllabus
𝒊𝑁𝑆𝐼𝐺𝐻𝑇 𝒊ℏ
PHYS598500 · WEEK 4 Noise, Fluxonium, and Protected-Qubit Design · Manual Slides
Slide previews—
01/ —