Abstract

Markovian master equations are a ubiquitous tool in the study of open quantum systems, but deriving them from first principles involves a series of compromises. On the one hand, the Redfield equation is valid for fast environments (whose correlation function decays much faster than the system relaxation time) regardless of the relative strength of the coupling to the system Hamiltonian, but is notoriously non-completely-positive. On the other hand, the Davies equation preserves complete positivity but is valid only in the ultra-weak coupling limit and for systems with a finite level spacing, which makes it incompatible with arbitrarily fast time-dependent driving. Here we show that a recently derived Markovian coarse-grained master equation (CGME), already known to be completely positive, has a much expanded range of applicability compared to the Davies equation, and moreover, is locally generated and can be generalized to accommodate arbitrarily fast driving. This generalization, which we refer to as the time-dependent CGME, is thus suitable for the analysis of fast operations in gate-model quantum computing, such as quantum error correction and dynamical decoupling. Our derivation proceeds directly from the Redfield equation and allows us to place rigorous error bounds on all three equations: Redfield, Davies, and coarse-grained. Our main result is thus a completely positive Markovian master equation that is a controlled approximation to the true evolution for any time-dependence of the system Hamiltonian, and works for systems with arbitrarily small level spacing. We illustrate this with an analysis showing that dynamical decoupling can extend coherence times even in a strictly Markovian setting.

Highlights

  • Modeling experiments requires taking into account that physical systems are open, i.e., not ideally isolated from their environments

  • Note that we had to make these assumptions for any y of bounded norm, not just density operators

  • H allows us to get a tighter bound, but the difference is most drastic for large τB/τSB when the bound is weaker than the trivial ρBM,I (t) − ρC,I (t) ≤ 1 + cBM

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Modeling experiments requires taking into account that physical systems are open, i.e., not ideally isolated from their environments. The time-dependent CGME is compatible with the assumption of arbitrarily fast gates, often made in the circuit model of quantum computing, e.g., in the analysis of fault-tolerant quantum error correction [42] This assumption was shown to be incompatible with the derivation of the Davies master equation [43]. We compare the range of applicability with other master equations, and note the spatial locality of the Lindblad generators of the CGME At this point we are ready to address the case of time-dependent Hamiltonians. This equation is well suited for the simulation of open system adiabatic quantum computation, and for dynamical decoupling, which involves the opposite limit of very fast system dynamics.

Three master equations
Background
The bath correlation time τB and the fastest system decoherence timescale τSB
Redfield master equation
Davies-Lindblad master equation
The time-independent case
The time-dependent case
Error bounds and range of applicability
Setting up
Coarse-grained master equation
Time-averaging of the state
Neglecting part of the integration domain to regain complete positivity
Complete positivity
Ranges of applicability of the three master equations
Scaling with size
The CGME with a time-dependent system Hamiltonian
Application: dynamical decoupling
Example 2: time-dependent CGME with an Ohmic spectral density
Lambless master equations
Role of the Lamb shift in the CGME
Error bounds and estimates
Born approximation error
The true solution is the limit of the perturbative series:
Markov approximation error
General analysis of time-averaging
Time averaging of the Redfield ME
Bound on the error due to enforcing complete positivity
Optimization of Ta
The Davies-Lindblad error
Redfield limits of integration error
Summary and Conclusions
B Lamb shift simplification
E An error bound that is linear in t
F Proof of Lemma 2
H Optimal time

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.