As the field of quantum computing progresses to larger-scale devices, multiplexing will be crucial to scale quantum processors. While multiplexed readout is common practice for superconducting devices, relatively little work has been reported about the combination of flux and microwave control lines. Here, we present a method to integrate a microwave line and a flux line into a single “XYZ line.” This combined control line allows us to perform fast single-qubit gates as well as to deliver flux signals to the qubits. The measured relaxation times of the qubits are comparable to state-of-the-art devices employing separate control lines. We benchmark the fidelity of single-qubit gates with randomized benchmarking, achieving a fidelity as high as 99.93±0.04%, and we demonstrate that XYZ lines can in principle be used to run parametric entangling gates.

Superconducting quantum processors are one of the leading platforms for near-term applications and large-scale quantum computing due to their flexibility in design, high-fidelity single- and two-qubit gates,1–4 and fast readout operations.5–7 An architecture with a square grid of superconducting qubits for the implementation of the surface code requires each qubit to be coupled to four nearest neighbors as well as individual control lines and resonators.8–10 Routing the control lines on the perimeter of a monolithic device poses some challenges to scaling, and several techniques have been developed to address this problem, including through-silicon vias and 3D coaxial architectures.11–13 3D wiring is not the only challenge for the development of a scalable architecture. As superconducting devices proceed past the 10-qubit era,8,9,14,15 it becomes necessary to multiplex the waveguides on the chip. This is already a common practice for readout lines,16,17 but little work has been reported on the combination of flux (Z) and microwave control (XY) lines because of the different nature of their coupling to the qubit. The combination of these lines into a single “XYZ line” approximately halves the number of on-chip input and output ports for a quantum computer based on tunable qubits, thereby reducing the complexity of the design and the circuitry in general.8–10 

A technical challenge in combining flux and control lines on a planar geometry comes from the different natures of their coupling to the qubit. The Z line is designed to provide an inductive coupling to the SQUID loop that is high enough to bias the qubit at a specific frequency with a relatively small current such that the overall thermal dissipation does not lead to excessive heating. This can be done by shorting the Z line to ground approximately 10μm away from the SQUID loop. The XY line instead is capacitively coupled to the qubit pads. The capacitive coupling to the 50Ω line must not be too small, otherwise strong microwave signals would be needed to operate single-qubit gates. At the same time, it must not be too high,18 in order not to limit the qubit relaxation time. Therefore, it is often necessary to position the end of the XY line further away from the qubit pads with respect to the end of the Z line. Combining flux and control lines on the same plane of the qubits can be problematic because of these different interplays.

In this work, we propose and experimentally demonstrate one possible way to combine XY and Z lines into a single XYZ line. By moving the XYZ lines to the surface of the cap using a flip-chip approach,19 the medium separating the line from the qubit is vacuum whose relative permeability and permittivity are both one. This brings the capacitive and inductive coupling between the XYZ line and the qubit on an equal footing. We show empirical evidence that our approach meets the stringent requirements of qubit applications: keeping a high qubit coherence, supporting microwave drives, and delivering DC and RF flux pulses to the qubits.

The device used for this investigation includes four tunable qubits, each capacitively coupled to a readout resonator. The cap contains two separate readout lines (each capacitively coupled to two resonators) and four XYZ lines, one per qubit. Most of the cap surface is covered with a meshed ground plane. The region of the cap that surmounts the qubits and resonators is characterized by a 24μm deep cavity.20 The device is bonded to a 6×6mm2 cap with a flip-chip bonder that provides an alignment precision of a few micrometers. Since the height of the flattened indium bumps is about 3μm, the distance between the qubit and the ground plane above is 27μm (see Fig. 1 for an optical image of the qubit and the associated XYZ line on top). The electrical connection between the two chips is tested at room temperature with dedicated test structures. The cap is wirebonded to a printed circuit board and mounted to the coldest plate of a dilution refrigerator with a 10mK base temperature.

FIG. 1.

A qubit and its associated XYZ line. (a) A side-view schematic of the chip and the cap bonded to it (not to scale). (b) Optical image of one qubit. The silicon substrate is in gray and the niobium film in lighter gray. The two superconducting pads are connected by a SQUID in the center of the image. (c) Optical image of the corresponding XYZ line on the cap. Almost the entire surface is covered by a meshed ground plane.

FIG. 1.

A qubit and its associated XYZ line. (a) A side-view schematic of the chip and the cap bonded to it (not to scale). (b) Optical image of one qubit. The silicon substrate is in gray and the niobium film in lighter gray. The two superconducting pads are connected by a SQUID in the center of the image. (c) Optical image of the corresponding XYZ line on the cap. Almost the entire surface is covered by a meshed ground plane.

Close modal

The attenuation and filtering of the XY and Z fridge lines connecting the room temperature instrumentation to the device are different. This is because the XY lines must support microwave signals in the 3–7 GHz band, which is the typical qubit frequency band. In addition, these lines must have a strong attenuation to reduce the thermal noise reaching the device.21 The Z lines instead provide low frequency pulses (DC1.5GHz) in order to bias the qubits at specific sweet spots and operate parametric entangling gates.22 The Z lines require a smaller attenuation than the XY lines.

Due to the different filtering requirements, the XY and Z fridge lines are combined at the lowest temperature plate of the dilution refrigerator. To this end, we have developed an in-house cryogenic diplexer as shown in Fig. 2(a). This device allows us not only to combine low and high frequency signals but also to filter the frequency components outside a specific frequency band by using a network of inductors and capacitors. To mitigate the injection of quasi particles generated by high-frequency photons, the diplexer also includes an eccosorb filter on the output line.23,24Figure 2(b) shows the measured transmission coefficient of a typical diplexer at room temperature and at 4K. The diplexer was designed to have a 3–7 GHz bandpass filter for the XY line (port 1) and a 1.5 GHz low-pass filter for the Z line (port 2). The transmission coefficient from port 1 to port 2 (not shown in the figure) is lower than 20dB up to 15GHz. In our experiment, one diplexer per qubit is thermally anchored to the 10 mK stage of the dilution refrigerator. We have performed several cool downs, and we have not noticed any degradation of their functionalities.

FIG. 2.

The diplexer. (a) Diagrammatic representation of the cryogenic diplexer. The input port 1 (2) receives 3–7 GHz (DC-1 GHz) microwave signals. They get combined and routed to port 3. The diplexer includes a low pass filter, a bandpass filter and an eccosorb. (b) Measured transmission coefficient between ports 13 and 23 for a typical diplexer at room temperature (magenta curve) and at 4 K (teal curve). The cryogenic measurements were taken with a 40 dB attenuation between the VNA and the diplexer inside the cryostat.

FIG. 2.

The diplexer. (a) Diagrammatic representation of the cryogenic diplexer. The input port 1 (2) receives 3–7 GHz (DC-1 GHz) microwave signals. They get combined and routed to port 3. The diplexer includes a low pass filter, a bandpass filter and an eccosorb. (b) Measured transmission coefficient between ports 13 and 23 for a typical diplexer at room temperature (magenta curve) and at 4 K (teal curve). The cryogenic measurements were taken with a 40 dB attenuation between the VNA and the diplexer inside the cryostat.

Close modal

The geometry of the XYZ line has been engineered to obtain an upper limit on T1 greater than 200μs, a mutual inductance with the SQUID loop of approximately 500fH, and a capacitive coupling high enough to enable 20nsπ-pulses with our fridge setup (see the supplementary material for a schematic of the fridge). To optimize these design parameters, we have performed full wave microwave simulations. The mutual inductance was tuned by varying the distance between the XYZ line and the SQUID as well as the width and length of the inductors shorting the line to ground. The mutual inductance can also be adjusted by changing the area of the SQUID loop. However, its perimeter cannot be too long in order not to limit the qubit coherence.25 With regard to the capacitive coupling, the area of the XYZ line that surmounts the qubit pads affects the coupling strength. As a result, the capacitive coupling can vary depending on the qubit geometry. The geometry illustrated in Fig. 1(b) is the result of an optimization process that takes into account the qubit relaxation time and the capacitive and inductive couplings.

Characterization of the device at base temperature shows that we can tune the qubit frequencies between 3.0and3.8GHz. The median of the relaxation time for all of the qubits over a day is T̃1=53μs, and transverse relaxation times at the maximum qubit frequency are T̃2*=10μs and T̃2E=49μs. The relaxation times fluctuate over time (see the supplementary material). This phenomenon has been reported elsewhere.26,27

We first verify the functionality of the XYZ lines by performing some Rabi experiments with 20 ns microwave pulses. To test the performance of the XYZ lines, we intentionally used longer pulses to separate the contribution from the line itself and leakage to the second level. Using 100 ns DRAG Gaussian pulses, we measured a single-qubit RB fidelity of 99.77±0.02% for qubit 1 [see the inset of Fig. 3(a); note that the theoretical limit imposed by the relaxation time of this qubit is 99.84% (Ref. 28)]. We recently cooled down a similar device with higher relaxation times and measured a RB fidelity of 99.96±0.02% with 20 ns microwave pulses. This demonstrates that fast high-fidelity single-qubit gates can be implemented with XYZ lines.

FIG. 3.

Characterization. (a) Qubit frequency as a function of flux bias. The black dot represents fmax. Inset: randomized benchmarking with optimized 100 ns single-qubit gates run at fmax. The solid line is a fit to Apn+B. From the fit, we extract a single-qubit gate fidelity of 99.77±0.02%. (b) Measured relaxation time T1 (teal dots) and transverse relaxation time T2* (magenta diamonds) as a function of flux bias. The error bars represent the uncertainty of the exponential fit for each experiment.

FIG. 3.

Characterization. (a) Qubit frequency as a function of flux bias. The black dot represents fmax. Inset: randomized benchmarking with optimized 100 ns single-qubit gates run at fmax. The solid line is a fit to Apn+B. From the fit, we extract a single-qubit gate fidelity of 99.77±0.02%. (b) Measured relaxation time T1 (teal dots) and transverse relaxation time T2* (magenta diamonds) as a function of flux bias. The error bars represent the uncertainty of the exponential fit for each experiment.

Close modal

We then assess that the XYZ lines can be used to deliver flux signals to the qubits. We measure the qubit frequency fq as a function of the applied DC as shown in Fig. 3(a). The qubit frequency is measured with spectroscopic measurements and Ramsey experiments. The data points are fitted with an analytical transmon model. At each flux bias, we measure the relaxation time T1 [see Fig. 3(b)]. The value of T1 does not show a significant flux dependence, and its average value is 75μs. Figure 3(b) includes the measurement of T2* as a function of flux close to the DC sweet spot. As expected, the transverse relaxation time increases substantially at the sweet spot where the sensitivity of the qubit frequency to flux noise is the lowest. Close to the DC sweet spots, T2* is above 10μs allowing high-fidelity single-qubit gates. Other devices fabricated on the same wafer show similar performance although they were measured without XYZ lines. We can, thus, conclude that XYZ lines can be used to tune the qubit frequency without compromising their relaxation time.

Next, we validate the ability of the XYZ lines to support RF flux pulses, crucial for the implementation of parametric entangling gates.22,29 In our experiment, the qubit starts at its maximum frequency fmax. A RF flux pulse Φ(t)=Φdc+Φaccos(ωdt) is delivered to the qubit where Φdc is the DC bias, Φac is the flux pulse amplitude, and ωd is the pulse frequency. The flux pulse induces periodic oscillations of the qubit frequency. The time average qubit frequency is measured with a Ramsey type experiment with the parametric modulation applied between two π/2 pulses. Figure 4 shows the measured effective qubit frequency as a function of the flux pulse amplitude. The data points are fitted to30 

f¯q(Φac)=1T0Tfq(t)dt=n=0sncos(2πnΦdc)J0(2πnΦac),
(1)

where T is the oscillation period, J0(x) is the Bessel function of the first kind, and the constants sn only depend on the Josephson and charging energies EJ1,EJ2, and EC. (Their analytical expression is presented in the supplementary material.) In our experiment, Φdc=0 since the qubit is initially parked at fmax. The flux pulse amplitude can be expressed in terms of the amplitude Ap generated by the room-temperature instrumentation as Φac=βAp, where β is a factor that can be extracted from the fit. As shown in the figure, we were able to reach the AC sweet spot, fmin, where we operate parametric entangling gates.31 Devices with XYZ lines are now used in our lab to run parametric entangling gates routinely.

FIG. 4.

Ramsey experiment with RF flux pulses. Time average qubit frequency as a function of flux pulse amplitude in a Ramsey type experiment. The qubit is initially parked at the maximum frequency fmax. After the first π/2 pulse, a RF flux pulse with amplitude Ap is applied to the qubit. This pulse makes the qubit frequency oscillate about fmax. This changes the effective qubit frequency to f¯q. The solid curve is a fit to Eq. (1). The amplitude has been expressed in terms of flux quanta using Φac=βAp where the factor β=0.510Φ0/V has been extracted from a fit.

FIG. 4.

Ramsey experiment with RF flux pulses. Time average qubit frequency as a function of flux pulse amplitude in a Ramsey type experiment. The qubit is initially parked at the maximum frequency fmax. After the first π/2 pulse, a RF flux pulse with amplitude Ap is applied to the qubit. This pulse makes the qubit frequency oscillate about fmax. This changes the effective qubit frequency to f¯q. The solid curve is a fit to Eq. (1). The amplitude has been expressed in terms of flux quanta using Φac=βAp where the factor β=0.510Φ0/V has been extracted from a fit.

Close modal

The combination of the XY and Z fridge lines into a single line by means of a cryogenic diplexer may lead to an undesired effect. When a π pulse is sent through the XY fridge line to excite the qubit, it produces a current that flows through the termination of the XYZ line. This current can inadvertently modulate the qubit frequency. In our setup, a 100 ns π pulse is implemented with a room-temperature amplitude of Vp=0.3V. The signal reaching the device creates a magnetic field through the SQUID of Φac=1.6×104Φ0. (Here, we assumed that the attenuation of the line is 85dB at the qubit frequency and the mutual inductance between the XYZ line and the SQUID is M=500fH.) This flux does not modulate the qubit frequency by an appreciable amount. Indeed, by approximating Eq. (1) close to fmax up to second order in Φac, we obtain

δf=f¯qfmax=π2EJ1/EJ22h(1+EJ1/EJ2)28EJΣEC(ΦacΦ0)2
(2)

and using the parameters for qubit 0 (EJ1/h=2140MHz,EJ2/h=9040MHz, EC/h=182MHz, EJΣ=EJ1+EJ2), we obtain a frequency shift of δf=79Hz. This shift is below the qubit linewidth and cannot be detected with Ramsey experiments.

In conclusion, we demonstrated full control of superconducting qubits by combining XY and Z lines into a single XYZ line. We showed that XYZ lines patterned on the surface of the cap can be used to implement fast single qubit-gates and tune the qubit frequency with both DC and fast flux biases. We tested the performance of single-qubit gates with randomized benchmarking achieving a fidelity as high as 99.93±0.04% (see Table I in the supplementary information). Realization of combined XY and Z lines can reduce the number of on-chip input ports, an important requirement when scaling superconducting quantum processors. The natural next step is to combine the XY cables and the Z cables into a single cable to further reduce the complexity of the fridge built out for quantum processors with a large number of qubits. This can be accomplished by engineering frequency-dependent attenuators. More sophisticated techniques for the multiplexing of the cables would require optical links.32 

See the supplementary material for more information about the fridge setup and the device parameters.

This material was based upon work supported by Rigetti Computing and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) under Agreement No. HR00112090058.

R.M. and S.P. developed the proposal. R.M., E.A.S., and S.P. acquired the data. R.M. and E.A.S. performed the data analysis. R.M. simulated and designed the device and the cap. J.-H.Y. simulated and designed the diplexer. F.O., A.B., M.F., and K.J. were responsible for the development of an optimal cap fabrication. R.M. wrote the manuscript. E.A.S., A.C., S. K., and S.P. edited the manuscript. S.P. was the principal investigator of the effort.

The data that support the findings of this study are available within the article and its supplementary material.

1.
S.
Sheldon
,
L. S.
Bishop
,
E.
Magesan
,
S.
Filipp
,
J. M.
Chow
, and
J. M.
Gambetta
, “
Characterizing errors on qubit operations via iterative randomized benchmarking
,”
Phys. Rev. A
93
,
012301
(
2016
).
2.
M.
Rol
,
C.
Bultink
,
T.
O'Brien
,
S.
De Jong
,
L.
Theis
,
X.
Fu
,
F.
Luthi
,
R.
Vermeulen
,
J.
de Sterke
,
A.
Bruno
 et al, “
Restless tuneup of high-fidelity qubit gates
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
7
,
041001
(
2017
).
3.
Y.
Sung
,
L.
Ding
,
J.
Braumüller
,
A.
Vepsäläinen
,
B.
Kannan
,
M.
Kjaergaard
,
A.
Greene
,
G. O.
Samach
,
C.
McNally
,
D.
Kim
 et al, “
Realization of high-fidelity CZ and ZZ-free iSWAP gates with a tunable coupler
,” arXiv:2011.01261 (
2020
).
4.
S. S.
Hong
,
A. T.
Papageorge
,
P.
Sivarajah
,
G.
Crossman
,
N.
Didier
,
A. M.
Polloreno
,
E. A.
Sete
,
S. W.
Turkowski
,
M. P.
da Silva
, and
B. R.
Johnson
, “
Demonstration of a parametrically activated entangling gate protected from flux noise
,”
Phys. Rev. A
101
,
012302
(
2020
).
5.
E.
Jeffrey
,
D.
Sank
,
J.
Mutus
,
T.
White
,
J.
Kelly
,
R.
Barends
,
Y.
Chen
,
Z.
Chen
,
B.
Chiaro
,
A.
Dunsworth
 et al, “
Fast accurate state measurement with superconducting qubits
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
112
,
190504
(
2014
).
6.
T.
Walter
,
P.
Kurpiers
,
S.
Gasparinetti
,
P.
Magnard
,
A.
Potočnik
,
Y.
Salathé
,
M.
Pechal
,
M.
Mondal
,
M.
Oppliger
,
C.
Eichler
 et al, “
Rapid high-fidelity single-shot dispersive readout of superconducting qubits
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
7
,
054020
(
2017
).
7.
J.
Heinsoo
,
C. K.
Andersen
,
A.
Remm
,
S.
Krinner
,
T.
Walter
,
Y.
Salathé
,
S.
Gasparinetti
,
J.-C.
Besse
,
A.
Potočnik
,
A.
Wallraff
 et al, “
Rapid high-fidelity multiplexed readout of superconducting qubits
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
10
,
034040
(
2018
).
8.
F.
Arute
,
K.
Arya
,
R.
Babbush
,
D.
Bacon
,
J. C.
Bardin
,
R.
Barends
,
R.
Biswas
,
S.
Boixo
,
F. G.
Brandao
,
D. A.
Buell
 et al, “
Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor
,”
Nature
574
,
505
510
(
2019
).
9.
M.
Gong
,
S.
Wang
,
C.
Zha
,
M.-C.
Chen
,
H.-L.
Huang
,
Y.
Wu
,
Q.
Zhu
,
Y.
Zhao
,
S.
Li
,
S.
Guo
 et al, “
Quantum walks on a programmable two-dimensional 62-qubit superconducting processor
,”
Science
372
,
948
952
(
2021
).
10.
Y.
Wu
,
W.-S.
Bao
,
S.
Cao
,
F.
Chen
,
M.-C.
Chen
,
X.
Chen
,
T.-H.
Chung
,
H.
Deng
,
Y.
Du
,
D.
Fan
 et al, “
Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor
,” arXiv:2106.14734 (
2021
).
11.
M.
Vahidpour
,
W.
O'Brien
,
J. T.
Whyland
,
J.
Angeles
,
J.
Marshall
,
D.
Scarabelli
,
G.
Crossman
,
K.
Yadav
,
Y.
Mohan
,
C.
Bui
 et al, “
Superconducting through-silicon vias for quantum integrated circuits
,” arXiv:1708.02226 (
2017
).
12.
D.-R. W.
Yost
,
M. E.
Schwartz
,
J.
Mallek
,
D.
Rosenberg
,
C.
Stull
,
J. L.
Yoder
,
G.
Calusine
,
M.
Cook
,
R.
Das
,
A. L.
Day
 et al, “
Solid-state qubits integrated with superconducting through-silicon vias
,”
npj Quantum Inf.
6
,
59
(
2020
).
13.
J.
Rahamim
,
T.
Behrle
,
M.
Peterer
,
A.
Patterson
,
P.
Spring
,
T.
Tsunoda
,
R.
Manenti
,
G.
Tancredi
, and
P.
Leek
, “
Double-sided coaxial circuit QED with out-of-plane wiring
,”
Appl. Phys. Lett.
110
,
222602
(
2017
).
14.
J.
Otterbach
,
R.
Manenti
,
N.
Alidoust
,
A.
Bestwick
,
M.
Block
,
B.
Bloom
,
S.
Caldwell
,
N.
Didier
,
E. S.
Fried
,
S.
Hong
 et al, “
Unsupervised machine learning on a hybrid quantum computer
,” arXiv:1712.05771 (
2017
).
15.
P.
Jurcevic
,
A.
Javadi-Abhari
,
L. S.
Bishop
,
I.
Lauer
,
D. F.
Bogorin
,
M.
Brink
,
L.
Capelluto
,
O.
Günlük
,
T.
Itoko
,
N.
Kanazawa
 et al, “
Demonstration of quantum volume 64 on a superconducting quantum computing system
,” arXiv:2008.08571 (
2020
).
16.
M.
Jerger
,
S.
Poletto
,
P.
Macha
,
U.
Hübner
,
E.
Il'ichev
, and
A. V.
Ustinov
, “
Frequency division multiplexing readout and simultaneous manipulation of an array of flux qubits
,”
Appl. Phys. Lett.
101
,
042604
(
2012
).
17.
J.
Kelly
,
R.
Barends
,
A. G.
Fowler
,
A.
Megrant
,
E.
Jeffrey
,
T. C.
White
,
D.
Sank
,
J. Y.
Mutus
,
B.
Campbell
,
Y.
Chen
 et al, “
State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit
,”
Nature
519
,
66
69
(
2015
).
18.
J. C.
Bardin
,
D. H.
Slichter
, and
D. J.
Reilly
, “
Microwaves in quantum computing
,”
IEEE J. Microwaves
1
,
403
427
(
2021
).
19.
M.
Vahidpour
,
W.
O'Brien
,
J. T.
Whyland
,
J.
Angeles
,
J.
Marshall
,
D.
Scarabelli
,
G.
Crossman
,
K.
Yadav
,
Y.
Mohan
,
C.
Bui
,
V.
Rawat
,
R.
Renzas
,
N.
Vodrahalli
,
A.
Bestwick
, and
C.
Rigetti
, “
Superconducting through-silicon vias for quantum integrated circuits
,” arXiv:1708.02226 (
2017
).
20.
W.
O'Brien
,
M.
Vahidpour
,
J. T.
Whyland
,
J.
Angeles
,
J.
Marshall
,
D.
Scarabelli
,
G.
Crossman
,
K.
Yadav
,
Y.
Mohan
,
C.
Bui
 et al, “
Superconducting caps for quantum integrated circuits
,” arXiv:1708.02219 (
2017
).
21.
S.
Krinner
,
S.
Storz
,
P.
Kurpiers
,
P.
Magnard
,
J.
Heinsoo
,
R.
Keller
,
J.
Luetolf
,
C.
Eichler
, and
A.
Wallraff
, “
Engineering cryogenic setups for 100-qubit scale superconducting circuit systems
,”
EPJ Quantum Technol.
6
,
2
(
2019
).
22.
S.
Caldwell
,
N.
Didier
,
C.
Ryan
,
E.
Sete
,
A.
Hudson
,
P.
Karalekas
,
R.
Manenti
,
M.
da Silva
,
R.
Sinclair
,
E.
Acala
 et al, “
Parametrically activated entangling gates using transmon qubits
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
10
,
034050
(
2018
).
23.
A. D.
Córcoles
,
J. M.
Chow
,
J. M.
Gambetta
,
C.
Rigetti
,
J. R.
Rozen
,
G. A.
Keefe
,
M. B.
Rothwell
,
M. B.
Ketchen
, and
M.
Steffen
, “
Protecting superconducting qubits from radiation
,”
Appl. Phys. Lett.
99
,
181906
(
2011
).
24.
R.
Barends
,
J.
Wenner
,
M.
Lenander
,
Y.
Chen
,
R. C.
Bialczak
,
J.
Kelly
,
E.
Lucero
,
P.
O'Malley
,
M.
Mariantoni
,
D.
Sank
 et al, “
Minimizing quasiparticle generation from stray infrared light in superconducting quantum circuits
,”
Appl. Phys. Lett.
99
,
113507
(
2011
).
25.
J.
Braumüller
,
L.
Ding
,
A. P.
Vepsäläinen
,
Y.
Sung
,
M.
Kjaergaard
,
T.
Menke
,
R.
Winik
,
D.
Kim
,
B. M.
Niedzielski
,
A.
Melville
 et al, “
Characterizing and optimizing qubit coherence based on squid geometry
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
13
,
054079
(
2020
).
26.
J. J.
Burnett
,
A.
Bengtsson
,
M.
Scigliuzzo
,
D.
Niepce
,
M.
Kudra
,
P.
Delsing
, and
J.
Bylander
, “
Decoherence benchmarking of superconducting qubits
,”
npj Quantum Inf.
5
,
54
(
2019
).
27.
S.
Schlör
,
J.
Lisenfeld
,
C.
Müller
,
A.
Bilmes
,
A.
Schneider
,
D. P.
Pappas
,
A. V.
Ustinov
, and
M.
Weides
, “
Correlating decoherence in transmon qubits: Low frequency noise by single fluctuators
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
123
,
190502
(
2019
).
28.
S.
Asaad
,
C.
Dickel
,
N. K.
Langford
,
S.
Poletto
,
A.
Bruno
,
M. A.
Rol
,
D.
Deurloo
, and
L.
DiCarlo
, “
Independent, extensible control of same-frequency superconducting qubits by selective broadcasting
,”
npj Quantum Inf.
2
,
16029
(
2016
).
29.
D. C.
McKay
,
S.
Filipp
,
A.
Mezzacapo
,
E.
Magesan
,
J. M.
Chow
, and
J. M.
Gambetta
, “
Universal gate for fixed-frequency qubits via a tunable bus
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
6
,
064007
(
2016
).
30.
N.
Didier
,
E. A.
Sete
,
M. P.
da Silva
, and
C.
Rigetti
, “
Analytical modeling of parametrically modulated transmon qubits
,”
Phys. Rev. A
97
,
022330
(
2018
).
31.
N.
Didier
,
E. A.
Sete
,
J.
Combes
, and
M. P.
da Silva
, “
AC flux sweet spots in parametrically modulated superconducting qubits
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
12
,
054015
(
2019
).
32.
F.
Lecocq
,
F.
Quinlan
,
K.
Cicak
,
J.
Aumentado
,
S.
Diddams
, and
J.
Teufel
, “
Control and readout of a superconducting qubit using a photonic link
,”
Nature
591
,
575
579
(
2021
).

Supplementary Material