= Solution
{c}
The five <DiVincenzo criteria> are: a scalable collection of well-characterized <qubits>; preparation in a known fiducial <quantum state>; relevant coherence times long compared with <quantum gate> times; a <universal quantum gate set>; and qubit-specific <quantum measurement>. The criterion is useful control of the whole computation, including errors, rather than merely observing two resolved levels.<The Physical Implementation of Quantum Computation by David P. DiVincenzo>[Section III, numbered requirements 1–5; Section IV's two communication requirements are additional]{ref}
For \b[trapped ions], the implementation is:
* \b[Scalable characterized <qubits>.] Two long-lived <hyperfine structure> levels or an optical ground/metastable pair in each <ion> encode $|0\rangle,|1\rangle$. An <ion trap> confines individually addressed <ions>. Extending a chain adds <qubits>, but increasing motional complexity, addressing errors and heating limit straightforward scaling; segmented traps and transport can help.
* \b[Initialization.] <Optical pumping> prepares the internal <quantum state>. <Doppler cooling> and, where required, <resolved sideband cooling> prepare the shared motion used for <quantum gates>.
* \b[Coherence.] Long-lived internal levels give coherence much longer than controlled pulse times. Magnetic noise, laser noise, scattering and motional heating cause <quantum decoherence>; suitable clock-state encodings and control reduce these errors.
* \b[Universal control.] Resonant optical, microwave or <Raman transitions> give arbitrary one-<qubit> rotations. Shared motional <normal modes>, coupled through the <Coulomb force>, mediate entangling <two-qubit gates>. Together these supply a <universal quantum gate set>.
* \b[Readout.] State-selective cycling <fluorescence>, often with <electron shelving>, produces a bright/dark signal resolved for individual <ions>.
For \b[trapped neutral atoms], the corresponding implementation is:
* \b[Scalable characterized <qubits>.] Long-lived ground-state <hyperfine structure> levels encode <qubits> in an <optical lattice> or an array of <optical tweezers>. Large arrays are feasible, but random loading, vacancies, atom loss and individual addressing must be controlled.
* \b[Initialization.] Cooling plus <optical pumping> prepares the internal <quantum state>. Filling or rearranging traps prepares a usable register; motional cooling is needed when the chosen <quantum gate> depends on motion.
* \b[Coherence.] Weak environmental coupling of neutral ground-state <chemical atoms> allows long coherence. Trap-light scattering, differential light shifts and magnetic noise limit it; switching traps or choosing suitable encodings can reduce these effects.
* \b[Universal control.] Microwave or <Raman transitions> implement one-<qubit> rotations. Ground-state <chemical atoms> do not have the ions' long-range <Coulomb force>, so that motional-bus construction cannot simply be copied. Controlled collisions or <Rydberg blockade> can nevertheless supply entangling <two-qubit gates>.
* \b[Readout.] State-dependent <fluorescence> or state-selective removal followed by imaging identifies a chosen <qubit>. Optical resolution, cross-talk and atom loss constrain repeated measurements.
Thus neither platform is forbidden from meeting a criterion in principle. Weak neutral-ground-state interactions make entangling control harder, but claiming that trapped neutral atoms cannot implement a <universal quantum gate set> would be false. Gate-model <quantum algorithms> using <Rydberg blockade> had already been demonstrated in a programmable neutral-atom processor by 2022.<Multi-qubit entanglement and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer by T. M. Graham and others>[Nature 604, 457–462 (2022), abstract and controlled-phase gate implementation]{ref}
Back to article page
