7
$\begingroup$

Among available qubit technologies for universal quantum computing these 3 come up as promising. NV centers and Majorana qubits also underway but relatively new. I find superconducting qubits and Trapped Ion qubits very hard to scale. Also T1(decoherence) and T2 (dephasing) for superconducting qubits is very less (us).

Being a non-physicist, I am not able to exactly locate good sources to convince myself why is one technology preferred over the other? I would really appreciate if you can direct me to relavant literature available on this topic.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

It think the (very) short answer is that there is not a preferred platform yet. This is why there are very active research communities around each of these technologies. Often if someone says otherwise they are probably working on one of the platforms :)

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Here's a paper comparing Trapped Ion and Superconducting (the main competitors right now) from the group at UMD which compares their trapped ion system with IBM's transmon (superconducting) system. If you want to look at a more algorithm-focused line of thought.

If you are looking for a more general summary of the strengths and weaknesses this paper seems to discuss all major options, and then this one focuses on Superconducting qubits in particular.

Hope that helps!

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Indeed, I'm looking for references similar to the 1st paper. Thanks! this helps. $\endgroup$
    – mando
    Commented Jul 30, 2018 at 7:57