Fig. 2: Summary of tomographic methods and selection of major identified physical error sources of the gate implementations based on GST for one- and two-qubit gates in devices A and B.
From: Assessment of the errors of high-fidelity two-qubit gates in silicon quantum dots
a, Measurement sequence principle used in randomized benchmarking. The gate of interest (G) is interleaved with N random Clifford gates (Ci) together with recovery Clifford (CR) that are composed of five primitive gates each. Recovery probability of the randomized benchmarking sequence as a function of Clifford gates for both interleaved and reference (ref) sequences in all devices. b, Simplified FBT workflow from experiment to result. FBT can analyse any gate sequence; IRB is used here as an example. c, GST workflow used in our experiment. d, Dephasing (stochastic) errors: these noise channels occur due to the \({T}_{2}^{\,*}\)-like decay during the operation and also non-Markovian contextual error sources (Fig. 3). The reduced error rate between DCZ is due to noise limited by \({T}_{2}^{\,{\rm{Hahn}}}\)-like decay instead. e, Physical Hamiltonian errors that result from operations such as AC-Stark shift, off-resonant driving or residual exchange during the single qubit operation. f, Calibration (systematic) errors, due to the errors in the calibration of the gates. g, Other major errors with no major physical attribution.
