AQCE

Experiments

One table per CSV file in data/. Sort by clicking a header, filter with the search box, and download the raw file to use the data yourself.

Quantum error correction

Implementations of QEC codes: code, [[n,k,d]] parameters, platform, rounds and more.

Download qec_exp.csvEdit on GitHub
62 / 62 rows
Paper
Improved quantum processor logical error rates via correction and detection · Paetznick et al.2026Ion trapsCarbon Code[[12,2,4]]Microsoft / QuantinuumCarbon = [[12,2,4]] self-dual CSS code, concatenation of [[4,2,2]] and [[6,2,2]] (Knill C4/C6 scheme); threshold ~3%, rate 1/6 at d=4; Quantinuum H2 trapped-ion QCCD; repeated error correction (up to 3 rounds) combining correction + detection with pre- and post-selection; measured logical error 0.017% (1 round), 0.3% (2 rounds), 0.5% (3 rounds), ~0.006% per-round fit in Table 1; 4.7x-800x gain over physical baselines; two-qubit gate count is reported only per round (98 CNOTs/round, >100 physical CNOTs per EC cycle), no per-experiment total tabulated; carbon experiments from arXiv:2404.02280
Improved quantum processor logical error rates via correction and detection · Paetznick et al.2026Ion trapsColor Code[[16,4,4]]Microsoft / QuantinuumTesseract subsystem colour code from self-dual [[16,6,4]] tesseract code (2 encoded qubits sacrificed as gauge qubits), distance 4, 4 logical qubits; one code block = 18 physical qubits (16 data + 2 reused ancillae); X and Z stabilisers measured in parallel, 8 CNOTs per weight-4 measurement pair = 64 CNOTs/round; Quantinuum H2; up to 5 rounds of post-selected fault-tolerant EC; graph states up to 12 logical qubits (cube graph = 12 logical CNOTs, 12-qubit cat = 11 logical CNOTs); acceptance >=50% (50-90%); logical error ~0.02% per round (2.1e-4/round fit); two-qubit gate count reported only per round (64 CNOTs/round), no per-experiment total tabulated; tesseract experiments from arXiv:2409.04628
Error detection without post-selection in adaptive quantum circuits · Chertkov et al.2025Ion trapsFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]QuantinuumQuantinuum H2-2, adaptive logical simulation, detected errors converted into random resets instead of post-selection, 4 ancilla qubits reused, qubit-reuse compilation, break-even for t<=6; 1000 shots
Magic state cultivation on a superconducting quantum processor · Rosenfeld et al.2025Superconducting circuitColor Code[[7,1,3]]Google Quantum AIWillow processor. Magic state cultivation via fault-tolerant logical H_L measurement + postselection, kickback tomography (KT) characterization, |T> fidelity 0.9999(1); 40x improvement over injection; fault distance 3; error scales as p^3, RL-calibrated control, each QEC cycle = 30 two-qubit gates + 6 measurements
Magic state cultivation on a superconducting quantum processor · Rosenfeld et al.2025Superconducting circuitSurface Code[[25, 1, 5]]Google Quantum AIWillow processor, cultivated |T> state grafted from d=3 color code into d=5 surface-code-compatible encoding, proof-of-principle code switching, 1 extension cycle + N-1 grafted-code cycles, decoded with Tesseract (A* most-likely-error decoder), LER ~7x higher than SI1000 simulation (leakage suspected), memory experiment up to N=9 QEC cycles
Hardware-efficient quantum error correction using concatenated bosonic qubits · Putterman et al.2024Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[[3,1,3]], [[5,1,5]]Amazon (AWS)Repetition cat codes below threshold
Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold · Acharya et al.2024Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]-[29,1,29]Google Quantum AIRepetition codes below threshold
Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold · Acharya et al.2024Superconducting circuitSurface Code[[9,1,3]], [[25,1,5]], [[49,1,7]]Google Quantum AISurface codes below threshold
Logical computation demonstrated with a neutral atom quantum processor · Reichardt et al.2024Neutral atomsBacon-Shor Code[[9,1,3]]Microsoft / QuEra
Logical computation demonstrated with a neutral atom quantum processor · Reichardt et al.2024Neutral atomsFour-qubit Code[[4,1,2]], [[4,2,2]]Microsoft / QuEra
Encoding a magic state with beyond break-even fidelity · Gupta et al.2024Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]IBM Quantum
End-to-End Quantum Simulation of a Chemical System · Dam et al.2024Ion trapsFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]MicrosoftError detection yielded a 3% rejection rate and the use of teleportation flags was responsible for the additional 50% rejection rate.
Fault-Tolerant Operation and Materials Science with Neutral Atom Logical Qubits · Bedalov et al.2024Neutral atomsFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]Atom Computing
Experimental Demonstration of Logical Magic State Distillation · Rodriguez et al.2024Neutral atomsColor Code[[7, 1, 3]], [[17,1,5]]Harvard / QuEra
Scaling and logic in the color code on a superconducting quantum processor · Lacroix et al.2024Superconducting circuitColor Code[[7, 1, 3]], [[17,1,5]]Google Quantum AI
Demonstrating dynamic surface codes · Eickbusch et al.2024Superconducting circuitSurface Code[[9,1,3]], [[25,1,5]]Google Quantum AI
Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit · Acharya et al.2023Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]-[25,1,25]Google Quantum AIRepetition codes below threshold
Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit · Acharya et al.2023Superconducting circuitSurface Code[[9,1,3]]-[[25,1,5]]Google Quantum AIRepetition codes below threshold
Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays · Bluvstein et al.2023Neutral atomsSurface Code[[9,1,3]], [[25,1,5]], [[49,1,7]]Harvard / QuEra
Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays · Bluvstein et al.2023Neutral atomsColor Code[[7,1,3]], [[8,3,2]]Harvard / QuEra
Comparative analysis of error mitigation techniques for variational quantum eigensolver implementations on IBM quantum system · Zhang et al.2022Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]Unknown
Optical demonstration of quantum fault-tolerant threshold · Sun et al.2022PhotonsFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]USTC
Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code · Krinner et al.2021Superconducting circuitSurface Code[[9,1,3]]ETH Zurich
A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays · Bluvstein et al.2021Neutral atomsSurface Code[[13,1,3]] surface code, [[16,2,2]] toric codeHarvard / QuEra
A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays · Bluvstein et al.2021Neutral atomsColor Code[[7,1,3]]Harvard / QuEra
A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays · Bluvstein et al.2021Neutral atomsCluster State1D with 12 qubitsHarvard / QuEra
Experimental Characterization of Fault-Tolerant Circuits in Small-Scale Quantum Processors · Cane et al.2021Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]Southampton
Benchmarking near-term devices with quantum error correction · Wootton et al.2020Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]-[22,1,22]Google Quantum AI
Exponential suppression of bit or phase flip errors with repetitive error correction · Chen et al.2020Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]-[11,1,11]Google Quantum AI
Exponential suppression of bit or phase flip errors with repetitive error correction · Chen et al.2020Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,1,2]]Google Quantum AI
Repeated Quantum Error Detection in a Surface Code · Andersen et al.2020Superconducting circuitSurface Code[[4,1,2]]ETH Zurich
Protecting quantum entanglement from leakage and qubit errors via repetitive parity measurements · Bultink et al.2020Superconducting circuitBell State[[2,0,2]]Delft (DiCarlo)
Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Quantum Error-Correction Code · Egan et al.2020Ion trapsBacon-Shor Code[[9,1,3]]Maryland / Duke / IonQ
Quantum teleportation of physical qubits into logical code-spaces · Luo et al.2020PhotonsBacon-Shor Code[[9,1,3]]USTC
Resource Optimal Realization of Fault-Tolerant Quantum Circuit · Goudarzi et al.2020Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]Unknown
Error detection on quantum computers improves accuracy of chemical calculations · Urbanek et al.2020Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]IBM Research
Experimental exploration of five-qubit quantum error correcting code with superconducting qubits · Gong et al.2019Superconducting circuit[[5,1,3]] Perfect Code[[5,1,3]]IBM Research
Entanglement stabilization using ancilla-based parity detection and real-time feedback in superconducting circuits · Andersen et al.2019Superconducting circuitBell State[[2,0,2]]ETH Zurich
Fault-Tolerant Logical Gates in the IBM Quantum Experience · Harper et al.2019Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]IBM Research
A repetition code of 15 qubits · Wootton et al.2018Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]-[8,1,8]IBM Research
Protecting quantum memories using coherent parity check codes · Roffe et al.2018Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]Durham / Sheffield
Is error detection helpful on IBM 5Q chips ? · Vuillot et al.2018Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]IBM Research
Testing quantum fault tolerance on small systems · Willsch et al.2018Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,2,2]]IBM Research
Experimental demonstration of fault-tolerant state preparation with superconducting qubits · Takita et al.2017Superconducting circuitColor Code[[4,2,2]]IBM Research
Fault-tolerant quantum error detection · Linke et al.2017Ion trapsColor Code[[4,2,2]]Maryland (Monroe)
Fault-tolerant quantum error detection · Linke et al.2017Ion trapsFour-qubit Code[[4,1,2]]Maryland (Monroe)
Experimental demonstration of fault-tolerant state preparation with superconducting qubits · Takita et al.2017Superconducting circuitFour-qubit Code[[4,1,2]]IBM Research
Repeated quantum error correction on a continuously encoded qubit by real-time feedback · Cramer et al.2016Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]Yale (Schoelkopf)
Detecting bit-flip errors in a logical qubit using stabilizer measurements · Riste et al.2015Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]Delft (DiCarlo)
Demonstration of a quantum error detection code using a square lattice of four superconducting qubits · Córcoles et al.2015Superconducting circuitBell State[[2,0,2]]IBM Research
State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit · Kelly et al.2014Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]-[5,1,5]UCSB / Google
Quantum error correction in a solid-state hybrid spin register · Waldherr et al.2014NV centersRepetition Code[[3,1,3]]Delft (Hanson)
Experimental demonstration of a graph state quantum error-correction code · Bell et al.2014PhotonsSurface Code[[4,1,2]]University of Bristol
Experimental Quantum Computations on a Topologically Encoded Qubit · Nigg et al.2014Ion trapsColor Code[[7,1,3]]Innsbruck (Blatt)
Realization of Three-Qubit Quantum Error Correction with Superconducting Circuits · Reed et al.2012Superconducting circuitRepetition Code[3,1,3]Yale (Schoelkopf)
Experimental implementation of encoded logical qubit operations in a perfect quantum error correcting code · Zhang et al.2012NMR[[5,1,3]] Perfect Code[[5,1,3]]IQC Waterloo
Experimental Repetitive Quantum Error Correction · Schindler et al.2011Ion trapsRepetition Code[3,1,3]Innsbruck (Blatt)
Demonstration of Sufficient Control for Two Rounds of Quantum Error Correction in a Solid-State Ensemble Quantum Information Processor · Moussa et al.2011NMRRepetition Code[3,1,3]IQC Waterloo
Experimental quantum error correction with high fidelity · Zhang et al.2011NMRRepetition Code[3,1,3]IQC Waterloo
Realization of quantum error correction · Chiaverini et al.2004Ion trapsRepetition Code[3,1,3]NIST
Benchmarking Quantum Computers: The Five-Qubit Error Correcting Code · Knill et al.2001NMR[[5,1,3]] Perfect Code[[5,1,3]]Los Alamos / MIT
Experimental Quantum Error Correction · Cory et al.1998NMRRepetition Code[3,1,3]Los Alamos / MIT

Magic states

Magic state preparation, distillation and code switching, with fidelity and acceptance rate.

Download msd_exp.csvEdit on GitHub
15 / 15 rows
Paper
Experimental demonstration of high-fidelity logical magic states from code switching · Daguerre et al.2025Ion trapsCode Switching|T>[[15,1,3]], Steane0.99949-27+2782.58
Magic state cultivation on a superconducting quantum processor · Rosenfeld et al.2025Superconducting qubitsCultivation + Grafting|T>Steane code to d=5 (grafted) Surface code0.9999-1+18
Experimental fault-tolerant code switching · Pogorelov et al.2024Ion trapsCode Switching|T>Steane, [[10,1,2]]0.963-4+419
Magic State Injection on IBM Quantum Processors Above the Distillation Threshold · Kim et al.2024Superconducting qubitsInjection|H>Surface code0.8806-2+236.3
Experimental Demonstration of Logical Magic State Distillation · Rodriguez et al.2024Neutral atomsPreparation and Distillation|M>Steane0.994-4+315 to 1
Scaling and logic in the color code on a superconducting quantum processor · Lacroix et al.2024Superconducting qubitsPreparation and Injection|T>Steane0.9992-15+375.2
Scaling and logic in the color code on a superconducting quantum processor · Lacroix et al.2024Superconducting qubitsPreparation and Injection|H>Steane0.9959-37+3874.6
Encoding a magic state with beyond break-even fidelity · Gupta et al.2023Superconducting qubitsPreparation|CZ>Surface code0.9877-11+1117
Logical Magic State Preparation with Fidelity beyond the Distillation Threshold on a Superconducting Quantum Processor · Ye et al.2023Superconducting qubitsPreparation|T>Surface code0.8771-9+973.41
Logical Magic State Preparation with Fidelity beyond the Distillation Threshold on a Superconducting Quantum Processor · Ye et al.2023Superconducting qubitsPreparation|H>Surface code0.9090-9+973.41
Realization of real-time fault-tolerant quantum error correction · Ryan-Anderson et al.2021Ion trapsPreparation|T>Steane0.978-6+6100
Demonstration of fault-tolerant universal quantum gate operations · Postler et al.2021Ion trapsPreparation|H>Steane0.994-14+513.7
Logical-qubit operations in an error-detecting surface code · Marques et al.2021Superconducting qubitsPreparation|T>Surface code0.966<25
Fault-tolerant control of an error-corrected qubit · Egan et al.2020Ion trapsPreparation|H>Bacon-Shor0.972-12+12100
Experimental purification of two-atom entanglement · Reichle et al.2006Ion trapsDistillation0.629-15+154 to 2

Entangled state error

Bell-state and two-qubit gate errors over time.

Download entangled_state_error_exp.csvEdit on GitHub
34 / 34 rows
Paper
High-fidelity entangling gates and nonlocal circuits with neutral atoms · Evered et al.2026Neutral atoms0.00146Rb, CZ gate, 99.854(4)% raw / 99.941(3)% loss-postselected, stable >10h
Benchmarking and Fidelity Response Theory of High-Fidelity Rydberg Entangling Gates · Tsai et al.2025Neutral atoms0.0029Sr, CZ gate
Spectroscopy and Modeling of 171Yb Rydberg States for High-Fidelity Two-Qubit Gates · Peper et al.2025Neutral atoms0.006Yb, CZ gate
A universal neutral-atom quantum computer with individual optical addressing and non-destructive readout · Radnaev et al.2025Neutral atoms0.0066Cs, CZ gate
An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon · Edlbauer et al.2025Semiconductor spins0.001Phosphorus atoms, nuclear CZ gate fidelity of 99.90(4)%
Trapped-ion two-qubit gates with > 99.99% fidelity without ground-state cooling · Hughes et al.2025Ion traps0.0000848.4(7)e−5, without the use of ground-state cooling%. <=5e−4 for ions with average phonon occupation numbers of up to n = 9.4(3) on the gate mode
Helios: A 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer · Ransford et al.2025Ion traps0.000792.5(1)×10−5 for single-qubit gates, 7.9(2)×10−4 for two-qubit gates, and 4.8(6)×10−4 for state preparation and measurement
Scalable, high-fidelity all-electronic control of trapped-ion qubits · Löschnauer et al.2024Ion traps0.0003Two-qubit maximally entangled states
High-fidelity universal gates in the 171Yb ground state nuclear spin qubit · Muniz et al.2024Neutral atoms0.006Yb, CZ gate
24 days-stable CNOT-gate on fluxonium qubits with over 99.9% fidelity · Lin et al.2024Superconducting circuits0.0006CNOT-phase gate error between two fluxonium qubits
Erasure conversion in a high-fidelity Rydberg quantum simulator · Scholl et al.2023Neutral atoms0.002Rydberg entangling operation error
High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral-atom quantum computer · Evered et al.2023Neutral atoms0.005Rb, CZ gate
Quantum logic with spin qubits crossing the surface code threshold · Xue et al.2022Semiconductor spins0.0035CZ gate
Fast universal quantum control above the fault-tolerance threshold in silicon · Noiri et al.2021Semiconductor spins0.005CNOT gate
Programming a quantum computer with quantum instructions · Kjaergaard et al.2020Superconducting circuits0.003controlled-phase gate error
High-Fidelity Entanglement and Detection of Alkaline-Earth Rydberg Atoms · Madjarov et al.2020Neutral atoms0.01Bell state error, SPAM-corrected
Parallel implementation of high-fidelity multi-qubit gates with neutral atoms · Levine et al.2019Neutral atoms0.03CZ gate error
Fidelity benchmarks for two-qubit gates in silicon · Huang et al.2019Semiconductor spins0.02average controlled-rotation gate error
High-fidelity quantum logic gates using trapped-ion hyperfine qubits · Ballance et al.2016Ion traps0.0008two-qubit gate error
High-Fidelity Universal Gate Set for $^9$Be$^+$ Ion Qubits · Gaebler et al.2016Ion traps0.0005two-qubit gate error
Procedure for systematically tuning up crosstalk in the cross resonance gate · Sheldon et al.2016Superconducting circuits0.009cross resonance gate error
Rydberg-blockade controlled-not gate and entanglement in a two-dimensional array of neutral-atom qubits · Maller et al.2015Neutral atoms0.21post-selected entanglement error on X operation conditioned on the control qubit being in state |0〉
Logic gates at the surface code threshold: Superconducting qubits poised for fault-tolerant quantum computing · Barends et al.2014Superconducting circuits0.006CZ gate error
Complete universal quantum gate set approaching fault-tolerant thresholds with superconducting qubits · Chow et al.2012Superconducting circuits0.02CNOT gate error
Entanglement of two individual neutral atoms using Rydberg blockade · Wilk et al.2010Neutral atoms0.25entangled state error
Demonstration of a neutral atom controlled-NOT quantum gate · Isenhower et al.2010Neutral atoms0.27CNOT gate error
Demonstration of Two-Qubit Algorithms with a Superconducting Quantum Processor · DiCarlo et al.2009Superconducting circuits0.05entangled state error
Towards Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing with Trapped Ions · Benhelm et al.2008Ion traps0.007Mølmer-Sørensen gate error
Measurement of the Entanglement of Two Superconducting Qubits via State Tomography · Steffen et al.2006Superconducting circuits0.13entangled Bell state error
Robust entanglement · Häffner et al.2005Ion traps0.04Bell state error
Experimental demonstration of a robust, high-fidelity geometric two ion-qubit phase gate · Leibfried et al.2003Ion traps0.03Bell state error
Experimental Violation of a Bell's Inequality with Efficient Detection · Rowe et al.2001Ion traps0.1Bell state error
Experimental Entanglement of Four Particles · Sackett et al.2000Ion traps0.17entangled state error
Deterministic entanglement of two trapped ions · Turchette et al.1998Ion traps0.3Bell state error

Qubit count

Physical qubit count records per platform.

Download qubit_count.csvEdit on GitHub
27 / 27 rows
Paper
Trapping 11,000 Atoms in a Tweezer Array Generated by a Single Metasurface · Wang et al.2026Neutral atoms11000Not rearranged; ~11,022 Rb atoms loaded per shot across 18,225 sites (135x135), 60.5% filling, generated by a single ~2 cm metasurface outside the vacuum cell
An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon · Edlbauer et al.2025Semiconductor spins11Phosphorus atoms
Helios: A 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer · Ransford et al.2025Ion traps98Barium hyperfine qubits
High-efficiency loading of 2,400 Ytterbium atoms in optical tweezer arrays · Zhu et al.2025Neutral atoms24002400 Yb-174 atoms in optical tweezer arrays, loading efficiency of 83.5(1)%, imaging fidelity 99.3(1)%
A tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits · Manetsch et al.2024Neutral atoms6100Not rearranged
AI-Enabled Rapid Assembly of Thousands of Defect-Free Neutral Atom Arrays with Constant-time-overhead · Lin et al.2024Neutral atoms2024Defect-free 2D and 3D atom arrays
Rearrangement of individual atoms in a 2000-site optical-tweezer array at cryogenic temperatures · Pichard et al.2024Neutral atoms2088Cryogenic environment at 6K
Controlling two-dimensional Coulomb crystals of more than 100 ions in a monolithic radio-frequency trap · Kiesenhofer et al.2023Ion traps100
Evidence for the utility of quantum computing before fault tolerance · Kim et al.2023Superconducting circuit127
In-situ equalization of single-atom loading in large-scale optical tweezers arrays · Schymik et al.2022Neutral atoms324
Universal control of a six-qubit quantum processor in silicon · Philips et al.2022Semiconductor spins6
Quantum Phases of Matter on a 256-Atom Programmable Quantum Simulator · Ebadi et al.2021Neutral atoms256
A four-qubit germanium quantum processor · Hendrickx et al.2021Semiconductor spins4
Defect-free assembly of 2D clusters of more than 100 single-atom quantum systems · Mello et al.2019Neutral atoms111
Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor · Arute et al.2019Superconducting circuit53
A Ten-Qubit Solid-State Spin Register with Quantum Memory up to One Minute · Bradley et al.2019NV centers10
A programmable two-qubit quantum processor in silicon · Watson et al.2018Semiconductor spins2
Observation of Entangled States of a Fully Controlled 20-Qubit System · Friis et al.2017Ion traps20
Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator · Bernien et al.2017Neutral atoms51
An atom-by-atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary 2d atomic arrays · Barredo et al.2016Neutral atoms50
Superconducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance · Barends et al.2014Superconducting circuit5
Implementing a strand of a scalable fault-tolerant quantum computing fabric · Chow et al.2013Superconducting circuit3
14-qubit entanglement: creation and coherence · Monz et al.2011Ion traps14
Entanglement of two individual neutral atoms using Rydberg blockade · Wilk et al.2010Neutral atoms2
Measurement of the Entanglement of Two Superconducting Qubits via State Tomography · Steffen et al.2006Superconducting circuit2
Experimental Entanglement of Four Particles · Sackett et al.2000Ion traps4
Experimental Demonstration of a Controlled-NOT Quantum Gate · Turchette et al.1998Ion traps2

Coherence times

T1 and T2 of physical qubits.

Download physical_qubits.csvEdit on GitHub
41 / 41 rows
Paper
High-coherence fluxonium qubits manufactured with a wafer-scale-uniformity process · Wang et al.2025Superconducting circuitFluxoniumJosephson junction0.0011680.000943T1 & T2 for their best device, with a qubit frequency f01 = 197 MHz
Quantum control of a cat-qubit with bit-flip times exceeding ten seconds · Réglade et al.2024Superconducting circuitCat encodingBosonic150.0000005
Autoparametric resonance extending the bit-flip time of a cat qubit up to 0.3 s · Marquet et al.2024Superconducting circuitCat encodingBosonic0.3
A tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits · Manetsch et al.2024Neutral atomsHyperfine11912.6
Methods to achieve near-millisecond energy relaxation and dephasing times for a superconducting transmon qubit · Tuokkola et al.2024Superconducting circuitTransmonJosephson junction0.0004250.000541Qubit frequency 2.9 GHz; T1 median 425 us, max 666 +/- 33 us; T2echo median 541 us, max 1057 +/- 138 us
One Hundred Second Bit-Flip Time in a Two-Photon Dissipative Oscillator · Berdou et al.2023Superconducting circuitCat encodingBosonic127
A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays · Bluvstein et al.2022Neutral atomsHyperfineRubidium41.5
Multi-qubit entanglement and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer · Graham et al.2022Neutral atomsHyperfineCesium41T2 using a XY8 pulse
Single ion qubit with estimated coherence time exceeding one hour · Wang et al.2021Ion trapsS1/2 mF=0 hyperfine levelsYtterbium5500
Demonstration of quantum error correction and universal gate set on a binomial bosonic logical qubit · Hu et al.2019Superconducting circuitBinomial encodingBosonic0.00010.0001The corrected logical qubit has a lifetime 2.8 times longer than that of its uncorrected counterpart.
Exponential suppression of bit-flips in a qubit encoded in an oscillator · Lescanne et al.2019Superconducting circuitCat encodingBosonic0.001
2000-times repeated imaging of strontium atoms in clock-magic tweezer arrays · Covey et al.2019Neutral atomsHyperfineStrontium420
Manufacturing low dissipation superconducting quantum processors · Nersisyan et al.2019Superconducting circuitTransmonJosephson junction0.000076an average T_1=76+/-13 μs across 24 qubits with the best qubits having T1>=110 μs
Fault-tolerant detection of a quantum error · Rosenblum et al.2018Superconducting circuitFock (3D)Bosonic0.00110.0014
The high-coherence fluxonium qubit · Nguyen et al.2018Superconducting circuitFluxonium (3D)Josephson junction0.00020.0003
Evolution of Nanowire Transmons and Their Quantum Coherence in Magnetic Field · Luthi et al.2018SemiconductorGatemonsemiconductor Josephson junction0.00001
Quantum coherent control of a hybrid superconducting circuit made with graphene-based van der Waals heterostructures · Wang et al.2018GrapheneGatemongraphene Josephson junction0.00000005
One-second coherence for a single electron spin coupled to a multi-qubit nuclear-spin environment · Abobeih et al.2018NV centerse spinDiamond36001.58
Single-qubit quantum memory exceeding ten-minute coherence time · Wang et al.2017Ion trapsS1/2 mF=0 hyperfine levelsYtterbium667
Demonstrating Quantum Error Correction that Extends the Lifetime of Quantum Information · Ofek et al.2016Superconducting circuitCat encodingBosonic0.00015The enhanced lifetime of the encoded information is 320µs without any post-selection.
Gatemon Benchmarking and Two-Qubit Operation · Casparis et al.2016SemiconductorGatemonsemiconductor Josephson junction0.000003
The Flux Qubit Revisited to Enhance Coherence and Reproducibility · Yan et al.2015Superconducting circuitC-sh. flux qubitJosephson junction0.000040.000085
A Schrodinger Cat Living in Two Boxes · Wang et al.2015Superconducting circuitFock (3D)Bosonic0.0040.001
A Semiconductor Nanowire-Based Superconducting Qubit · Larsen et al.2015SemiconductorGatemonsemiconductor Josephson junction0.00000080.000001
Coherent suppression of electromagnetic dissipation due to superconducting quasiparticles · Pop et al.2014Superconducting circuitFluxonium (3D)Josephson junction0.0010.00002
Thermal and Residual Excited-State Population in a 3D Transmon Qubit · Jin et al.2014Superconducting circuitTransmon (3D)Josephson junction0.00010.0002
High-Fidelity Preparation, Gates, Memory, and Readout of a Trapped-Ion Quantum Bit · Harty et al.2014Ion trapsHyperfine atomic-clock statesCalcium50
Improved superconducting qubit coherence using titanium nitride · Kim et al.2013Superconducting circuitTransmonJosephson junction0.000070.00007
Superconducting qubit in waveguide cavity with coherence time approaching 0.1ms · Rigetti et al.2012Superconducting circuitTransmon (3D)Josephson junction0.000070.000095
Observation of high coherence in Josephson junction qubits measured in a three-dimensional circuit QED architecture · Paik et al.2011Superconducting circuitTransmon (3D)Josephson junction0.000070.000015
Dynamical decoupling and noise spectroscopy with a superconducting flux qubit · Bylander et al.2010Superconducting circuitFlux qubitJosephson junction0.0000120.000023
Fluxonium: single Cooper pair circuit free of charge offsets · Manucharyan et al.2009Superconducting circuitFluxoniumJosephson junction0.00000035
Measurement of the decay of Fock states in a superconducting quantum circuit · Wang et al.2008Superconducting circuitFock (2D)Bosonic0.0000030.000006
Controlling the spontaneous emission of a superconducting transmon qubit · Houck et al.2007Superconducting circuitTransmonJosephson junction0.0000040.000002
Fast Quantum State Control of a Single Trapped Neutral Atom · Jones et al.2007Neutral atomsHyperfineRubidium30.034Spin-echo, dephasing time of 370µs. T1=trap lifetime in the absence of any near-resonant light
Dephasing of a superconducting qubit induced by photon noise · Bertet et al.2005Superconducting circuitFlux qubitJosephson junction0.0000050.000005
Long-Lived Qubit Memory Using Atomic Ions · Langer et al.2005Ion traps2s2S1/2 F=1, mF=1 and F=2, mF=2Beryllium14.7
Coherent Quantum Dynamics of a Superconducting Flux Qubit · Chiorescu et al.2003Superconducting circuitFlux qubitJosephson junction0.0000010.00000002
Manipulating the Quantum State of an Electrical Circuit · Vion et al.2002Superconducting circuitQuantroniumJosephson junction0.0000010.0000008
Charge echo in a Cooper-pair box · Nakamura et al.2001Superconducting circuitCooper-pair boxJosephson junction0.0000000090.000000005
Coherent control of macroscopic quantum states in a single-Cooper-pair box · Nakamura et al.1999Superconducting circuitCooper-pair boxJosephson junction0.000000002