Correction
Correction to: Ultrafast control of superconducting qubits observed by time-resolved spectroscopy
See the correction: Correction to: Ultrafast control of superconducting qubits observed by time-resolved spectroscopy (https://doi.org/10.58303/a0j3t476)
Ultrafast control of superconducting qubits observed by time-resolved spectroscopy
Sakura Takahashi1*
1School of Environmental Sciences, Anatolian Technical University, Turkey
* Corresponding author.
Ann. Quantum Condens. Matter Phys. 2024, 4(1), e5639; https://doi.org/10.58303/4r5cee25
Abstract
Despite considerable progress in recent years, several fundamental questions about superconducting qubits remain open. We observe good agreement between exact diagonalization and the measured spectra, and we show that the result is stable under a range of perturbations of the assumptions. In contrast to earlier studies, our approach accounts for heterogeneity and avoids the usual simplifying assumptions. We observe a crossover between two distinct regimes controlled by the coupling strength. Together, these results contribute to a more complete picture and open the way to further applications.
Introduction
Let be a bounded domain with Lipschitz boundary and let . We consider the boundary value problem1
Existence of weak solutions in follows from the direct method of the calculus of variations. Our interest here is in sharp quantitative bounds that do not depend on the dimension.
Main result
Theorem 1. Suppose with . Then there is a constant such that
The proof combines a truncation argument with the Sobolev inequality . A second estimate, for the gradient, is given by
Numerical illustration
Table 1 reports computed values of the constant in (2) for several choices of the parameters, and Fig. 1 shows the decay of the error under mesh refinement.
Table 1 Computed values of the constant
| d | p | q | C (computed) | C (bound) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2 | 2 | 0.081 | 0.125 |
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 0.147 | 0.210 |
| 3 | 2 | 3 | 0.052 | 0.083 |
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 0.209 | 0.341 |
Fig. 1 Error versus mesh size on a logarithmic scale; the dashed line has slope 2.
Discussion
The bound (2) is sharp up to the value of the constant, as the radial example shows. Extensions to systems and to variable exponents will be treated elsewhere.
Here the divergence and gradient are taken in the sense of distributions.
References
- 1 Haddad, R., Kowalski, J. (1992). A note on Markov kernels. Phys. Rev. E 116, 728–1053.
- 2 Okonkwo, C., Nakagawa, K. (2021). Asymptotics of integral operators. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 116, 792–1134.
- 3 Ivanova, T., Moreau, A. (2018). Estimates for elliptic systems. J. Comput. Phys. 106, 529–961.
- 4 Haddad, R., Yilmaz, E. (2014). Numerical study of lattice models. J. Comput. Phys. 35, 578–1189.
- 5 Haddad, R., Banerjee, S. (1989). On the structure of random walks. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 52, 380–922.
- 6 Gunnarsson, H., Albrecht, M. (2024). A note on Markov kernels. Discrete Math. 81, 875–947.
- 7 Kowalski, J., Banerjee, S. (1989). Asymptotics of integral operators. Phys. Rev. E 39, 13–1147.
- 8 Ivanova, T., Haddad, R. (1998). Estimates for elliptic systems. Phys. Rev. E 35, 226–907.
- 9 Nakagawa, K., Fernandes, P. (1996). Numerical study of lattice models. Discrete Math. 105, 388–1130.
- 10 Gunnarsson, H., Fernandes, P. (2017). On the structure of random walks. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 79, 835–909.
Declarations
Funding
This work was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (KAKENHI JP22H01234).
Competing Interests
One author is a consultant for a company that manufactures related equipment. The company had no role in the design of the study or the interpretation of the results.
Data Availability
All data supporting the findings are available in the supplementary material and in a public repository.
Copyright and License
© 2024 Meridian Academic Press