arXiv:2610.36365
Suppressing microwave crosstalk in superconducting quantum processors by designing parasitic drive capacitances
Anuj Aggarwal, Jorge Fernández-Pendás, Simon Pettersson Fors, Zakaria Mohamed, Halldór Jakobsson, Amr Osman, Janka Biznárová, Andreas Nylander, Anita Fadavi Roudsari, Marcus Rommel, Anton Frisk Kockum, Giovanna Tancredi
Abstract
As superconducting quantum processors scale to large qubit counts, unwanted microwave drive crosstalk becomes an important source of coherent errors. Here, we investigate the role of parasitic coupling paths in the suppression of drive crosstalk in a processor with two fixed-frequency transmon qubits and a tunable coupler. To account for the many different coupling paths, we develop a detailed circuit model to capture the dependence of crosstalk on the coupler frequency. We experimentally demonstrate suppression of crosstalk, finding that the suppression does not originate solely from cancellation of the effective qubit-qubit coupling, but also is a result of interference between other coupling paths. Building on these insights, we show that drive crosstalk can be suppressed with the right choice of parasitic capacitances, which otherwise often are treated as unwanted design imperfections. Our results provide practical guidance for low-crosstalk device design of superconducting quantum processors and point toward a broader strategy in which parasitic coupling paths are engineered rather than simply minimized.
AI Summary
Microwave drive crosstalk can persist even when a tunable coupler cancels effective qubit–qubit exchange. This paper examines whether interference among drive pathways can explain and suppress that residual crosstalk, using two fixed-frequency floating transmons and a grounded tunable coupler. A circuit model includes drive-line capacitances to the target qubit, victim qubit, and coupler. Eliminating floating-qubit common modes, applying a first-order high-frequency expansion, and diagonalizing the quadratic Hamiltonian gives analytical dressed drive amplitudes and cancellation conditions. These predictions are compared with numerical Floquet simulations and measured self- and cross-Rabi rates versus coupler frequency. The qubits operate near 4.752 and 4.658 GHz; drive powers are referenced to 20 MHz self-Rabi rates with the coupler far detuned. Both cross-Rabi responses exhibit minima approximately 0.3 GHz above the estimated exchange-cancellation point at 3.665 GHz. Simultaneous fits to self- and cross-Rabi data require parasitic drive-to-coupler and drive-to-victim pathways. Parameter sweeps predict that engineering these capacitances can align the two directional crosstalk nulls, potentially at a low-$ZZ$ operating point. A two-level calculation predicts corresponding suppression of off-resonant victim excitation. Capacitance-engineered alignment and gate-fidelity improvements are not experimentally demonstrated. One measured minimum is shallower than predicted, attributed to additional microwave pathways absent from the model. The floating-versus-grounded design comparison depends on the chosen drive asymmetries rather than establishing a general architectural advantage. Off-resonant estimates assume weak driving and neglect small cross-Kerr shifts.
Error found: Both system-parameter tables give coupling constants with signs opposite to those required by the paper's circuit-to-Hamiltonian formula. Using the printed Hamiltonian and tabulated couplings, the effective qubit–qubit exchange is approximately +7.80 MHz at the claimed 3.665 GHz cancellation point, rather than zero, making that quantitative comparison inconsistent as written.
Written by gpt-6.1-sol from the paper's full text. Automated: it can be wrong.