14 Questions You Might Be Afraid to Ask About The Route To Robust Quantum Computing: Interview With Shruti Puri

14 Questions You Might Be Afraid to Ask About The Route To Robust Quantum Computing: Interview With Shruti Puri
The Route To Robust Quantum Computing: Interview With Shruti Puri


Quantum computing is a fundamentally new way of storing and processing information based on the principles of quantum mechanics. Conventional computers store data in binary "bits" at 0 or 1, while quantum computers store data in quantum bits or quotes. A quit can be both 0 and 1 at the same time and remembers many quits simultaneously.

Everyone agrees that this technology can bring a lot of considerable energy, but why aren't we there yet? To understand the challenges in this field and its possible solutions, we recently conducted a PhD interview with people who work on the frontiers of this exciting field. Puri is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Applied Physics at Yale University, and is credited with his significant theoretical discoveries in quantum error correction that could pave the way for powerful quantum computing technology.



What is the main challenge you are addressing in quantum computing?

For recent advances in research and development, there are already small to medium-sized quantum computers available by large companies. But these quantum computers have not been able to apply any practical application like drug and material discovery. The reason is that quantum computers are extremely fragile at the moment and even very small words from their work environment can destroy fragile quantum states very quickly. It is almost impossible to completely separate quantum states from the environment, so we need a way to correct them before quantum states are destroyed.


At first glance, quantum error correction seems impossible. Due to the measurement principle of quantum mechanics, we cannot directly investigate the quantum state to see if there are any errors, because such activities would destroy the quantum state itself.


Fortunately, in the 1990s, people found an indirect way to faithfully identify and correct errors in the quantum state. These, of course, cost huge resources overhead. If a quiet is affected by the word, we need to use at least five additional qubits to correct this error. The more errors we want to correct, the more extra quits it will take. Plenty of research efforts including my own are dedicated to improving quantum error correction strategies.



What is your discovery? How will this discovery help solve the challenge mentioned above?

In recent years, I’ve been interested in new Quit designs that have some built-in protection against noise. Specifically, I have developed one of which will be automatically suppressed by a kind of quantum error design. This halves the total number of quantum errors! Thus, the caterpillars that Quantum computers receive need less physical quibits to correct errors than other Quantum computers.


The caterpillar is not the only quotient with this property, but what makes the caterpillar special is that it is possible to maintain this protection when a user tries to change the quantum state in a certain non-trivial way. By comparison, for the common qubit, the law that changes the user's state automatically destroys the protection. Since its discovery, the Kerr-Cat has generated a lot of interest in the community and opened up a whole new direction for quantum error correction.



Do you collaborate with experimenters as a theorist? How is this concerted effort helping you?

Yes, I collaborate quite closely with the experts experimentally. The combination of experiments and theories is important to solve the practical challenges facing quantum information science ner sometimes providing a new tool for an experimental observation or groundbreaking theorist that they can explore or model new quantum effects. At other times, a new theoretical prediction will drive experimental progress.

At Yale, I have had the privilege of working alongside Steve Gervin's theoretical group and Michelle DeVoret and Rob Shoelkoff's experimental group, who are world leaders in superconducting quantum data processing. The theoretical development of Ker-Cat Quibit is actually the result of trying to undo any bugs in the test. Members of Michelle's group also contributed to the development of this theory. What’s more, Michelle’s group first demonstrated the Ker-Cat Quiet experimentally. It was a feeling to be surprised to see this theory come alive in the laboratory!


Are there even more experimental developments that you are excited about?

I’m also very interested in a new generation of quits that are evolving in several other academic groups that have some inherent protection against words. Kerr-Cat is one of them, Gottsmann-Katayev-Preskill Quibit, Cat-Codes, Binomial Codes, 0 - π Quit, etc. 2000 practical but with experimental advances they have now appeared and are serious competitors in practical quantum data processing. In the years to come, the field of quantum error correction is going to be strongly influenced by the capabilities enabled by these new Quit designs. So, I look forward to learning how the tests progress.

Post a Comment

0 Comments