Benchmarking Quantum Error Correction, Dynamical Decoupling, and Feedback Control for Entanglement Preservation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70162/mijarcse/2022/v8/i2/v8i201Keywords:
Quantum entanglement, error mitigation, quantum error correction, dynamical decoupling, feedback control, quantum fidelity, decoherence, NISQ, quantum noise, entanglement lifetime, quantum robustness, fidelity gain, quantum simulations, noise resilience, quantum system design.Abstract
Quantum entanglement serves as a foundational resource for quantum computing, communication, and sensing. However, in practical implementations, entangled states are highly vulnerable to decoherence induced by environmental noise, especially in Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) systems. This paper presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of three leading error mitigation strategies—Quantum Error Correction (QEC), Dynamical Decoupling (DD), and Feedback Control—focusing on their effectiveness in preserving entanglement fidelity under dephasing, amplitude damping, and thermal noise. Simulations were conducted on systems of up to 100 qubits, using consistent benchmarks for entanglement lifetime, fidelity degradation, and statistical robustness across noise types. Our results reveal that while QEC delivers superior fidelity at low noise levels, it suffers rapid degradation with increasing decoherence and high resource overhead. DD offers efficient protection under structured noise but shows sensitivity to pulse timing and noise variability. Feedback Control consistently outperforms both methods in entanglement preservation, exhibiting the highest fidelity retention, longest entanglement lifetime, and lowest variance across conditions. The findings offer actionable insights into the deployment of noise-resilient control techniques for near-term quantum technologies.
References
P. W. Shor, "Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory," Phys. Rev. A, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. R2493–R2496, Oct. 1995.
D. Gottesman, "Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction," arXiv preprint, arXiv:quant-ph/9705052, 1997.
A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, "Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation," Phys. Rev. A, vol. 86, no. 3, p. 032324, 2012.
L. Viola and S. Lloyd, "Dynamical suppression of decoherence in two-state quantum systems," Phys. Rev. A, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 2733–2744, Oct. 1998.
H. Y. Carr and E. M. Purcell, "Effects of diffusion on free precession in nuclear magnetic resonance experiments," Phys. Rev., vol. 94, no. 3, pp. 630–638, May 1954.
H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, "Quantum theory of optical feedback via homodyne detection," Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 548–551, Feb. 1993.
R. van Handel, J. K. Stockton, and H. Mabuchi, "Feedback control of quantum state reduction," IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 768–780, Jun. 2005.
K. Khodjasteh and D. A. Lidar, "Fault-tolerant quantum dynamical decoupling," Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 95, no. 18, p. 180501, Oct. 2005.
J. Preskill, "Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond," Quantum, vol. 2, p. 79, 2018.
K. Temme, S. Bravyi, and J. M. Gambetta, "Error mitigation for short-depth quantum circuits," Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 119, no. 18, p. 180509, Oct. 2017.
A. Kandala et al., "Error mitigation extends the computational reach of a noisy quantum processor," Nature, vol. 567, pp. 491–495, Mar. 2019.
S. J. Devitt, W. J. Munro, and K. Nemoto, "Quantum error correction for beginners," Rep. Prog. Phys., vol. 76, no. 7, p. 076001, 2013.
B. M. Terhal, "Quantum error correction for quantum memories," Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 307–346, 2015.
M. J. Biercuk, H. Uys, A. P. VanDevender, N. Shiga, W. M. Itano, and J. J. Bollinger, "Optimized dynamical decoupling in a model quantum memory," Nature, vol. 458, no. 7241, pp. 996–1000, 2009.
H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Measurement and Control. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009.
D. A. Lidar, "Review of decoherence-free subspaces, noiseless subsystems, and dynamical decoupling," Adv. Chem. Phys., vol. 154, pp. 295–354, 2014.
C. J. Ballance et al., "High-fidelity quantum logic gates using trapped-ion hyperfine qubits," Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 117, no. 6, p. 060504, Aug. 2016.
F. Arute et al., "Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor," Nature, vol. 574, pp. 505–510, Oct. 2019.
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). You may share and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes with appropriate attribution. For more details, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
