Quantum state transfer through a lossy bus: fundamental error limits for every control pulse, with application to IBM's meter-scale interconnects

How small can pulse shaping make the error of quantum state transfer between two qubits, such as superconducting qubits in different modules, through a lossy bus (a resonator, a waveguide or a cable mode)? We give bounds that hold for every control pulse, every duration and any number of bus modes, knowing only the maximal coupling strength G, the qubit loss rate γ and the bus loss rate κ ≥ γ. The population delivered in time T obeys P(T) ≤ e^{−γT}/[1 + (κ−γ)/(G²T)]: going slowly costs qubit loss, going fast costs bus loss, and no pulse escapes both. The end qubits cannot be bypassed either: in the frame where the qubits are lossless, every transfer keeps the excitation in them for an integrated time bounded below by a quantity that tends to π/(2G). As γ/(κ−γ) → 0 and √(γ(κ−γ))/G → 0, the error cannot fall below 2√(2γ(κ−γ))/G (1 − o(1)); this constant was known as the optimum of perturbative and quasi-adiabatic pulse optimisation; here it bounds every control, and an explicit pulse attains it with explicit error terms. Markovian dephasing enters through the same equations with rates 2/T₂; with a different coherence time for each element the bounds give the floor of a real device, and a reciprocity relation makes the direction of transfer irrelevant. For the four links of IBM's meter-scale relay experiment (arXiv:2610.29986), no pulse can bring the error below 6.03–10.05 × 10⁻⁴ (certified with interval arithmetic) if dephasing is Markovian at the measured T₂*, and not below 1.5–1.8 × 10⁻⁴ for any dephasing noise; the measured errors are 11–16 times larger. Doubling the coupling halves the floor; the dephasing of the worse qubit is the next lever; a 26-ns trapezoidal pulse at 18 MHz brings all four links below 10⁻³ within the model. The floor, the occupation lemma, the frontier lemma and the window comparisons are machine-checked in Isabelle/HOL, and every number comes with the script that produces it. Part II of a study whose Part I is «Certified Speed-Limit Diagnostics for Deployed Superconducting Quantum Processors». Companion site (blueprint, with the laboratory «Check your link»): https://karlesmarin.github.io/blueprints/relay-floors/. English and Spanish versions; sources and supplementary package (scripts, data, Isabelle theories, certificates).

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23836449
Primary Topic
Quantum Information and Cryptography
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Quantum state transfer through a lossy bus: fundamental error limits for every control pulse, with application to IBM's meter-scale interconnects

Carles Marín Muñoz
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Quantum Information and Cryptography
preprint

Quantum state transfer through a lossy bus: fundamental error limits for every control pulse, with application to IBM's meter-scale interconnects

Carles Marín Muñoz
preprint en

Abstract

How small can pulse shaping make the error of quantum state transfer between two qubits, such as superconducting qubits in different modules, through a lossy bus (a resonator, a waveguide or a cable mode)? We give bounds that hold for every control pulse, every duration and any number of bus modes, knowing only the maximal coupling strength G, the qubit loss rate γ and the bus loss rate κ ≥ γ. The population delivered in time T obeys P(T) ≤ e^{−γT}/[1 + (κ−γ)/(G²T)]: going slowly costs qubit loss, going fast costs bus loss, and no pulse escapes both. The end qubits cannot be bypassed either: in the frame where the qubits are lossless, every transfer keeps the excitation in them for an integrated time bounded below by a quantity that tends to π/(2G). As γ/(κ−γ) → 0 and √(γ(κ−γ))/G → 0, the error cannot fall below 2√(2γ(κ−γ))/G (1 − o(1)); this constant was known as the optimum of perturbative and quasi-adiabatic pulse optimisation; here it bounds every control, and an explicit pulse attains it with explicit error terms. Markovian dephasing enters through the same equations with rates 2/T₂; with a different coherence time for each element the bounds give the floor of a real device, and a reciprocity relation makes the direction of transfer irrelevant. For the four links of IBM's meter-scale relay experiment (arXiv:2610.29986), no pulse can bring the error below 6.03–10.05 × 10⁻⁴ (certified with interval arithmetic) if dephasing is Markovian at the measured T₂*, and not below 1.5–1.8 × 10⁻⁴ for any dephasing noise; the measured errors are 11–16 times larger. Doubling the coupling halves the floor; the dephasing of the worse qubit is the next lever; a 26-ns trapezoidal pulse at 18 MHz brings all four links below 10⁻³ within the model. The floor, the occupation lemma, the frontier lemma and the window comparisons are machine-checked in Isabelle/HOL, and every number comes with the script that produces it. Part II of a study whose Part I is «Certified Speed-Limit Diagnostics for Deployed Superconducting Quantum Processors». Companion site (blueprint, with the laboratory «Check your link»): https://karlesmarin.github.io/blueprints/relay-floors/. English and Spanish versions; sources and supplementary package (scripts, data, Isabelle theories, certificates).

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Quantum Information and Cryptography
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon