Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE

Control of decoherence (Invited Paper)

Saverio Pascazio, Paolo Facchi A

Published May 23, 2005• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

We discuss three control strategies aimed at countering the effects of decoherence: the first hinges on frequent projective measurements, the second on frequent unitary "kicks" ("bang-bang" pulses) and the third on a strong continuous coupling. Decoherence is suppressed if the frequency N of the measurements/kicks is large enough or if the coupling K is sufficiently strong: in all these cases, the Hilbert space of the system splits into invariant subspaces, among which any transition is hindered. However, if N or K are large, but not extremely large, all these control procedures accelerate decoherence.

DOI
10.1117/12.611332

Related papers

INVARIANT SUBSPACES AND CONTROL OF DECOHERENCE

Paolo Facchi A, V.L. LEPORE, Saverio Pascazio

We discuss three control strategies, all aimed at countering the effects of deciherence. The first strategy hinges upon the quantum Zeno effect, the second makes use of frequent unitary interruptions ("bang-bang" pulses) and the third of a strong, continuous coupling. Decoherence is suppressed if the frequency N of the measurements/pulses is large enough or if the coupling K is sufficiently strong. However, if N or K are large, but not sufficiently large, all procedures accelerate decoherence.

•Mar 1, 2006•0 citations

CONTROL OF DECOHERENCE VIA QUANTUM ZENO SUBSPACES

Paolo Facchi A, Hiromichi Nakazato, Saverio Pascazio +1 more

We discuss three control strategies, whose objective is to counter the effects of decoherence: the first strategy hinges upon the quantum Zeno effect, the second makes use of frequent unitary interruptions ("bang-bang" pulses), and the third of a strong, continuous coupling. Decoherence can be suppressed only if the frequency τ-1 of the measurements/pulses is large enough or if the coupling K is sufficiently strong. Otherwise, if τ-1 or K are large, but not sufficiently large, all these control procedures accelerate decoherence.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•May 20, 2006•2 citations

Control of decoherence: Analysis and comparison of three different strategies

Paolo Facchi A, S. Tasaki, Saverio Pascazio +3 more

We analyze and compare three different strategies, all aimed at controlling and eventually halting decoherence. The first strategy hinges upon the quantum Zeno effect, the second makes use of frequent unitary interruptions (``bang-bang'' pulses and their generalization, quantum dynamical decoupling), and the third uses a strong, continuous coupling. Decoherence is shown to be suppressed only if the frequency $N$ of the measurements or pulses is large enough or if the coupling $K$ is sufficiently strong. Otherwise, if $N$ or $K$ is large, but not extremely large, all these control procedures accelerate decoherence. We investigate the problem in a general setting and then consider some practical examples, relevant for quantum computation.

arXiv:quant-ph/0403205•Physical Review A•Feb 8, 2005•213 citations

Continuous and Pulsed Quantum Control

Giovanni Gramegna, Daniel Klaus Burgarth, Paolo Facchi A +1 more

We consider two alternative procedures which can be used to control the evolution of a generic finite-dimensional quantum system, one hinging upon a strong continuous coupling with a control potential and the other based on the application of frequently repeated pulses onto the system. Despite the practical and conceptual difference between them, they lead to the same dynamics, characterised by a partitioning of the Hilbert space into sectors among which transitions are inhibited by dynamical superselection rules.

Italian Quantum Information Science Conference (IQIS)•Jun 24, 2019•1 citation

Suppression of Decoherence Using Bang-Bang Controls

Yanhui Wang, Xiao-Shu Liu, Yang Liu +2 more

To suppress the decoherence, in addition to error-correcting codes and the error-avoiding codes, bang-bang control has also been introduced. Here in this work, we discuss how to suppress decoherence in quantum systems using bang-bang control, two cases have been discussed, adiabatic decoherence alone, and decoherence with both phase and amplitude damping. We also discussed the different cases when the system is made up of one atom or multi-atom and when such atom with two level or multi-level. It is found that in all the above cases, bang-bang control can suppress decoherence effectively.

Chinese Control Conference (CCC)•Aug 1, 2006•0 citations

Using parity kicks for decoherence control

David Vitali, P. Tombesi

We show how it is possible to suppress decoherence using tailored external forcing acting as pulses. In the limit of infinitely frequent pulses decoherence and dissipation are completely frozen; however, a significant decoherence suppression is already obtained when the frequency of the pulses is of the order of the reservoir typical frequency scale. This method could be useful in particular to suppress the decoherence of the center-of-mass motion in ion traps.

arXiv:quant-ph/9808055•Physical Review A•Jun 1, 1999•305 citations
We discuss three control strategies aimed at countering the effects of decoherence: the first hinges on frequent projective measurements, the second on frequent unitary "kicks" ("bang-bang" pulses) and the third on a strong continuous coupling. Decoherence is suppressed if the frequency N of the measurements/kicks is large enough or if the coupling K is sufficiently strong: in all these cases, the Hilbert space of the system splits into invariant subspaces, among which any transition is hindered. However, if N or K are large, but not extremely large, all these control procedures accelerate decoherence.
We discuss three control strategies, all aimed at countering the effects of deciherence. The first strategy hinges upon the quantum Zeno effect, the second makes use of frequent unitary interruptions ("bang-bang" pulses) and the third of a strong, continuous coupling. Decoherence is suppressed if the frequency N of the measurements/pulses is large enough or if the coupling K is sufficiently strong. However, if N or K are large, but not sufficiently large, all procedures accelerate decoherence.
We discuss three control strategies, whose objective is to counter the effects of decoherence: the first strategy hinges upon the quantum Zeno effect, the second makes use of frequent unitary interruptions ("bang-bang" pulses), and the third of a strong, continuous coupling. Decoherence can be suppressed only if the frequency τ-1 of the measurements/pulses is large enough or if the coupling K is sufficiently strong. Otherwise, if τ-1 or K are large, but not sufficiently large, all these control procedures accelerate decoherence.
We analyze and compare three different strategies, all aimed at controlling and eventually halting decoherence. The first strategy hinges upon the quantum Zeno effect, the second makes use of frequent unitary interruptions (``bang-bang'' pulses and their generalization, quantum dynamical decoupling), and the third uses a strong, continuous coupling. Decoherence is shown to be suppressed only if the frequency NNN of the measurements or pulses is large enough or if the coupling KKK is sufficiently strong. Otherwise, if NNN or KKK is large, but not extremely large, all these control procedures accelerate decoherence. We investigate the problem in a general setting and then consider some practical examples, relevant for quantum computation.
We consider two alternative procedures which can be used to control the evolution of a generic finite-dimensional quantum system, one hinging upon a strong continuous coupling with a control potential and the other based on the application of frequently repeated pulses onto the system. Despite the practical and conceptual difference between them, they lead to the same dynamics, characterised by a partitioning of the Hilbert space into sectors among which transitions are inhibited by dynamical superselection rules.
To suppress the decoherence, in addition to error-correcting codes and the error-avoiding codes, bang-bang control has also been introduced. Here in this work, we discuss how to suppress decoherence in quantum systems using bang-bang control, two cases have been discussed, adiabatic decoherence alone, and decoherence with both phase and amplitude damping. We also discussed the different cases when the system is made up of one atom or multi-atom and when such atom with two level or multi-level. It is found that in all the above cases, bang-bang control can suppress decoherence effectively.