sign in sign up
<<
Home , Quantum key distribution

arXiv:1709.00120v2 [quant-ph] 5 Dec 2017 † ∗ itneqatmcmuiaint ers h harmful long- the for depress repeaters to quantum communication in entangled quantum technique purity distance a higher is a It to state. state entangled mixed local purifi- [20–34]. entanglement entan- cation and [12–14], [15–19], concentration subspaces error-rejecting glement efficiency decoherence-free the the as with improve such coding to communication, inter- quantum proposed some of are Therefore, one. methods entangled esting the process. of mixed communication efficiency a the whole reduces or become inevitably state consequence will This entangled state environment entangled partially the maximally a from the decoherence practice, the in to Due communication their max- channel. construct in to pairs states legiti- entangled the imally two use usually the parties remote efficiently, mate accomplish communication To key quantum [8–11]. quantum the communication quan- 3], direct and [7], secure [2, sharing tum secret coding quantum dense [4–6], telepor- distribution quantum quantum [1], as such tation communication, quantum for orsodn uhr [email protected] author: Corresponding ulse nPy.Rv A Rev. Phys. in Published a Zhang Hao oaiainetnlmn uicto fnnoa microw nonlocal of purification entanglement Polarization nageetprfiaini sdt rnfranon- a transfer to used is purification Entanglement resource indispensable an is entanglement Quantum ffc ytm hc a eraie yculn w supercon two the coupling with by molecule realized superconducting be a detec to can QND The which nondemolit systems elements. microwave effect quantum linear parity-check the environment and polarization from operation, the decoherence to entangled of ele maximally due means quantum of decrease purity circuit the will in that channels effect problem the cross-Kerr solve the can pur on entanglement based polarization original an microwave-ba of we efficiency and Here, Therefo security high successfully. the launched ensuring for been has satellite quantum ASnmes 36.p 52. 25.q 03.67.Hk 42.50.Pq, 85.25.Dq, 03.67.Pp, numbers: PACS communication. quantum satellite anal communicat as and quantum such QED long-distance future, in circuit the applications in system good measurement has QND of parameters 1 , 2 irwv htn aebcm eyipratqbt nquan in important very become have photons Microwave inLiu Qian , .INTRODUCTION I. 5 eateto ahmtc,QadIAa nvriy Isla University, Quaid-I-Azam Mathematics, of Department 3 colo cecs iga nvriyo ehooy Qing Technology, of University Qingdao Sciences, of School 1 96 eateto hsc,ApidOtc ejn raMjrLa Major Area Optics Applied Physics, of Department 3 eateto hsc,Tigu nvriy ejn 10008 Beijing University, Tsinghua Physics, of Department uSegXu Xu-Sheng , 530(2017). 052330 , 4 tt e aoaoyo o-iesoa unu hsc an Physics Quantum Low-Dimensional of Laboratory Key State igAdlzzUiest,Jda 18,SuiArabia Saudi 21589, Jeddah University, Abdulaziz King 2 AMRsac ru,Dprmn fMathematics, of Department Group, Research NAAM ejn omlUiest,Biig107, 100875, Beijing University, Normal Beijing rs-ereeti ici QED circuit in effect cross-Kerr 4 u Xiong Jun , Dtd uy3 2018) 3, July (Dated: N tp ee tutr.W ieteapial experimental applicable the give We structure. level -type 1 he Alsaedi Ahmed , 2–4.Freape n19,Bennett 1996, in proposed entangle- example, been interesting For have some (EPPs) [20–34]. date, protocols To purification ment noise. of influence esrmns n20,Pan 2001, In state single-photon Werner and measurements. a gates in controlled-NOT two pairs using photon by [35] for EPP original an posed lmns n20,Sheng 2008, Pan In 2003, elements. In entanglement. al. spatial source using (PDC) by nonideal conversion assisted a down for EPP parametric an proposed spontaneous [23] en- In Pan ideal and elements. an optical 2002, for linear simple state with entangled source mixed tanglement general a for EPP ogtdnlmmnu ere ffedmwt SWAP with multiple- gates. and freedom hyper- freedom of for of degrees degree method longitudinal-momentum polarization universal the a Liu, in Wang, presented EPP 2016, [31] In Deng and states. Bell polarization- hyperentangled nonlocal spatial in for systems hy- four- (hyper-EPP) two-step two-photon a protocol proposed [30] purification deterministic Deng a perentanglement and Ren in 2014, the systems In introduced two-photon way. cross- [26] for the Deng and EPP on Sheng based original 2010, source In PDC effect. a Kerr for EPP polarization 3,3] thlsabgavnaeo odsaaiiyfor scalability good on advantage big matter a and holds light It 37]. study between [36, to interaction way a fundamental provides the (TLRs), resonators trans- line superconducting mission to qubit superconducting the ples ici unu lcrdnmc QD,wihcou- which (QED), electrodynamics 2]dmntae hsEPb sn ieroptical linear using by EPP this demonstrated [24] e ti eesr n ennfltask meaningful and necessary a is it re, fiainpooo o olclmicrowave nonlocal for protocol ification e unu omncto npractice. in communication quantum sed o sitdb irwv htn in photons microwave by assisted ion o QD eetr h -flipping the detector, (QND) ion ttsue o osrcigquantum constructing for used states os.Ti aki copihdby accomplished is task This noise. o scmoe fsvrlcross-Kerr several of composed is tor utn rnmsinln resonators line transmission ducting toyais(E) u protocol Our (QED). ctrodynamics 2 aaa Hayat Tasawar , u omncto stefirst the as communication tum z h dlte.Orprotocol Our fidelities. the yze aa 40,Pakistan 44000, mabad a 603 China 266033, dao ∗ v htn ae nthe on based photons ave ,China 4, boratory, tal. et d 2 , 5 tal. et 2]pooe nefficient an proposed [25] n uGoDeng Fu-Guo and , 2]peetdan presented [22] tal. et 2]pro- [20] 1 , 2 † et 2 processing [38–46]. Many studies then describe the process for the QND measurement have focused on circuit QED [47–53]. As a very impor- on two cascade TLRs in Sec. IIB. We present an EPP tant and interesting phenomenon, the cross-Kerr effect for microwave-photon pairs in Sec. III A and perform has been researched in circuit QED in recent years [54– the EPP for polarization-spatial entangled microwave- 59]. For example, in 2009, Rebi´c et al. [54] proposed photon pairs in Sec. IIIB. In Sec. IIIC, we design the rea- the giant Kerr nonlinearities at microwave frequencies in sonable parameters for QND measurement systems and circuit QED. In 2011, Hu et al. [56] presented a theo- analyze the fidelities. A summary is given in Sec. IV. retical scheme to generate the cross-Kerr effect between two TLRs. In 2013, Hoi et al. [58] observed the gi- (a) (b) j Vg1 ant cross-Kerr effect for propagating microwaves exper- TLR A 1u 4 C /2 E Cg 2 imentally induced by an artificial atom. In 2015, Hol- J1 F J1 3 e1 n ,F land et al. [59] demonstrated the single-photon resolved d2 11 d j E cross-Kerr effect between two microwave resonators in 1 d1 m g experiment. A microwave photon is a very important 2 F N et F ec g1 qubit for quantum communication because of its low loss W b jcl jcr C j a 2 2u and strong anti-interference during transmission. Due Cm/2 n ,F to the decoherence from environment, the maximally en- 1 F 22 C /2 E C tangled microwave photon state may become a partially J 2 J 2 g 2 TLR B j V entangled pure state or a mixed one in the process of 2d g1 transmission and storage. To keep the high efficiency FIG. 1: (a) Schematic diagram of the cross-Kerr effect in- and fidelity of quantum communication, the legitimate duced by coupling TLR A (top, blue) and B (bottom, red) parties in quantum communication should make an en- to a superconducting molecule (middle, circle with N ). The tanglement concentration or purification on the partially molecule can be controlled by external coils (left coils). The entangled microwave photon state or the mixed one, re- N -type level structure of the artificial molecule is shown in the spectively. An original entanglement concentration pro- right dashed line box. (b) The structure of superconducting tocol has been proposed for microwave photons [19]. To quantum circuit for the molecule [56]. date, there is no research on entanglement purification of the nonlocal entangled states of microwave-photon pairs. Therefore, the entanglement purification of microwave- photon states is an extremely important and necessary task for microwave-based quantum communication. The II. THE QND MEASUREMENT SYSTEM IN microwave photon qubit can be manipulated effectively CIRCUIT QED [53, 60, 61]. For example, Narla et al. [53] realized the basic microwave beam splitter which plays a very impor- A. Cross-Kerr effect between two TLRs tant role for microwave and used it to generate the robust concurrent remote entanglement The schematic diagram for realizing the cross-Kerr ef- between two superconducting qubits. The polarization fect between two TLRs is shown in Fig. 1. The cross- can be manipulated by adjusting the material parame- Kerr effect can be realized by coupling two TLRs to a ters [60, 61]. four level N -type superconducting molecule as shown in In this paper, we propose a physically feasible polariza- Fig. 1(a). The level structure is depicted in the dashed tion EPP on the nonlocal entangled microwave photons line box. TLR A and TLR B are coupled to the levels in circuit QED. By using our EPP, the parties can ef- 1 3 and 2 4, respectively. The transition between the fectively purify the mixed entangled states induced by levels− 2 and− 3 is driven by a classical pump laser with the decoherence from environment noise in microwave- the strength Ωc. In the , the Hamil- based quantum communication. This task is achieved tonian of the whole interaction system is given by [56] with the polarization parity-check QND measurements (with ¯h = 1) on microwave-photon pairs, the bit-flipping operations, and the linear microwave elements. The parity-check Hˆ = δ σˆ + δ σˆ + ig σˆ aˆ† σˆ aˆ 1 33 2 44 1 13 − 31 quantum nondemolition (QND) detector is composed of  two cross-Kerr systems for microwave photons and is a +ig σˆ ˆb† σˆ ˆb + iΩc (ˆσ σˆ ) , (1) 2 24 − 42 23 − 32 crucial part to implement the polarization entanglement   purification. We give the applicable experimental param- where the detunings are δ = E ω and δ = E ω . 1 31 − 1 2 42 − 2 eters of a QND measurement system and analyze the fi- ω1 and ω2 are the frequencies of the TLRs A and B, re- delities. The protocol has some good applications in non- spectively.σ ˆij = i j is the transition operator from local microwave-based quantum communication, such as | ih | the states j to i .a ˆ (ˆa†) and ˆb (ˆb†) are the annihila- satellite quantum communication. tion (creation)| i operators| i for the modes of TLRs A and This article is organized as follows: We first review B, respectively. g1 and g2 are the coupling strengths the cross-Kerr effect in circuit QED in Sec. IIA and for corresponding interactions between TLRs and levels. 3

2 Under the conditions that g1/Ωc 1 and g2 δ2 B. The Quantum nondemolition measurement on [64], one can adiabatically| eliminate| ≪ the atomic| |≪| degrees| total photon number of transmission-line resonators of freedom and obtain the effective cross-Kerr interaction based on cross-Kerr effect Hamiltonian [56] The total photon number of TLRs can be measured ˆ ˆ ˆ with QND by means of the cross-Kerr effect. The de- HK = χaˆ†aˆb†b, (2) tailed schematic diagram is shown in Fig. 2. All the TLRs in the top and the bottom are the readout and storage 2 2 2 where χ = g1g2/(δ2Ωc) is the cross-Kerr coefficient. resonators, respectively. The Homedyne detection has − been used for microwave in circuit QED experiment [45]. The molecule with an N -type level structure can be The probe light in the coherent state α is input from the constructed in the superconducting circuit described in left and measured via an X homodyne| i measurement on Fig. 1(b). The two loops (bottom and top) are two trans- the right. Here, we use the input-output relationship to mon qubits [62]. The right loop is a superconducting explain the whole process. When the probe light is res- quantum interference device (SQUID) [63] which is used onant with readout resonators, the Heisenberg-Langevin to connect two qubits. Each loop is composed equations for each cross-Kerr media in the probe light of two identical Josephson junctions labeled with crosses. path are given by Cj /2 (j = m, 1, 2) and EJi (i = c, 1, 2) represent the capacitance and energy of the Josephson junctions, re- ˆ˙ ˆ κ2 ˆ ˆin bk = iχk nˆkbk bk √κ2 bk , (3) spectively. The gate voltages labeled with Vg1 and Vg2 − − 2 − bias the corresponding via the gate capacitors Cg1 and Cg2, respectively. Φe1, Φe2, Φec, and Φet are where k = 1, 2 andn ˆk =a ˆk† aˆk represents the photon external fluxes. ϕcr, ϕcl, ϕ1u, ϕ1d, ϕ2u, and ϕ2d are the number operator of the k-th storage resonator. We as- gauge-invariant phases across the Josephson junctions. sume that all TLRs labeled with A and B have the same By using the two-level language in the region EJ Ec, decay rates κ1 and κ2, respectively. one can obtain the N-type level form [56, 62] shown≫ in Now, we consider the situation that the decay rate of ˙ Fig. 1(a). The eigenstates and the corresponding eigen- the readout resonator κ χk nˆk . One can make ˆbk = 2 ≫ h i values are i and Ei (i =1, 2, 3, 4), respectively. 0 in Eq. (3). Combining with the standard cavity input- | i output relationship ˆbout = ˆbin + √κ2 ˆb [65, 66], where ˆ ˆ bÙin bÙout = bÙin bÙout bin and bin† satisfy the standard commutation relations a 1 1 2 2 XX [ˆbin(t), ˆb† (t′)] = δ(t t′), one can obtain the reflection k k in − 2 2 coefficients which are expressed as TLR TLR

out κ2 ˆb iχknˆk

B k B r (ˆn )= = − 2 . (4) 2 k k 1 ˆin iχ nˆ + κ2 bk k k 2 N N Our goal is to make a QND measurement on the total photon number in two storage resonators (the two TLRs TLR TLR A1 and A2 in the bottom of Fig. 2). For this task, a in A

A probe light in the coherent state α is input from the 2 1 | i k k left, and let us assume that there are n1 photons in TLR 1 1 A1. When the probe light leaves TLR B1, the state of Kerr-1 Kerr-2 Kerr-1 becomes

out iθn out FIG. 2: Schematic diagram of QND measurement of the total ψ = n e 1 α . (5) | iK1 | 1i| i1 photon number of the two TLRs labeled with A (i.e., A1 and A2). The two TLRs labeled with B (i.e., B1 and B2) with Here θn1 = arg[r1(n1)] and n1 is a Fock state. One can | i the same decay rate κ2 are the readout resonators and all the make an X homodyne measurement to infer the photon TLRs labeled with A with the decay rate κ1 are the storage number in TLR A1 because the phase shift depends on resonators. The circle with N stands for a superconducting the photon number n1. When the probe light passes N molecule with the -type level structure. The direction of through TLR B2, two Kerr media become a cascaded the arrow represents the spread direction of the probe light. system. Therefore, we set ˆbin = ˆbout because the input The elements labeled with a circular arrow in a big circle are 2 1 field of resonator B is the output field of resonator B . circulators. |αi represents the probe light. |XihX| represents 2 1 the homodyne measurement on the coherent state of the probe The input-output relationship of this cascaded system is ˆout ˆin light. b2 = r2(n2)r1(n1)b1 . Let us assume that the photon number in TLR A2 is n2. After the probe light leaves resonator B2, its state is given by α out = eiθn1+n2 α out, (6) | i2 | i2 4

TABLE I: The corresponding relation between the states of TABLE II: The corresponding relation between the states the signal light and the phase shifts. of the signal light and the phase shifts by using the same cross-Kerr media in each QND detector. |aˆ1i ⊗ |aˆ2i Total phase shift ˆ ˆ |0i ⊗ |0i arg [r1(0) · r2(0)] cˆ1cˆ2/d1d2(|aˆ1i|aˆ2i) Total phase shift |1i ⊗ |0i arg [r1(1) · r2(0)] |V i|V i→ (|0i|1i) θ1 |2i ⊗ |0i arg [r1(2) · r2(0)] |Hi|Hi→ (|1i|0i) θ1 |0i ⊗ |1i arg [r1(0) · r2(1)] |Hi|V i→ (|1i|1i) θ2 |1i ⊗ |1i arg [r1(1) · r2(1)] |V i|Hi→ (|0i|0i) θ0 |0i ⊗ |2i arg [r1(0) · r2(2)]

where where 1 Φ† cd = ( H c H d + V c V d), | i √2 | i | i | i | i θn n = θn + θn = arg [r (n ) r (n )] , (7) 1+ 2 1 2 1 1 · 2 2 1 Ψ† cd = ( H c V d + V c H d). (12) where θn2 = arg [r2(n2)]. | i √2 | i | i | i | i To make an effective homodyne detection, we detect the position quadrature X of the coherent state. The H and V represent the horizontal and the vertical po- in the coherent state is given by [67, 68] larizations of microwave photons, respectively. The sym- bol f with the relationship f = Φ† ρˆcd Φ† is the fi- 1 iθ iΦ(X) h | | i X αe = f(X, α cos θ)e , (8) delity of the state Φ† (f > 2 ). In this way, the h | i state of the system composed| i of two microwave-photon where the functions are given by pairs is just the mixture of four states. They are 2 Φ† c d Φ† c d with a probability of f , Φ† c d Ψ† c d | i 1 1| i 2 2 | i 1 1| i 2 2 1 1 2 and Ψ† c1d1 Φ† c2d2 with the same probability of (1 f(X,y) = 4 exp[ (x 2y) ] | i | i −2 √2π −4 − f)f, and Ψ† c1d1 Ψ† c2d2 with a probability of (1 f) . | i | i − Φ(X) = α sin θ(x 2α cos θ)mod(2π). (9) The principle of our EPP for the polarization entangle- − ment of nonlocal microwave-photon pairs from two iden- Therefore, for states αeiθ1 and αeiθ2 , the mid- tical ideal entanglement sources is shown in Fig. 3. Here, | i | i point and distance between the peaks of correspond- we choose two same cross-Kerr systems, i.e., χ1 = χ2, ing functions f(X, α cos θ1) and f(X, α cos θ2) are Xm = to accomplish the QND measurement process for parity α(cos θ1 + cos θ2) and Xd = 2α(cos θ1 cos θ2), respec- check. We will discuss the physical implementation in tively. According to the result of position,− one can distin- Sec. III C. The microwave polarizing beam splitter (PBS) guish the different phases. The error probability is given shown in Fig. 3 can pass the photons in the state H and by [68] reflect the photons in the state V . Therefore,| ini the QND part of this protocol, we can| i change H and V 1 Xd | i | i to 1 and 0 forc ˆ1dˆ1, respectively. Forc ˆ2dˆ2, H and V Perror = erfc , (10) 2 2√2 can| bei represented| i by 0 and 1 , respectively.| i The dif-| i ferent polarization states| i and corresponding| i phase shifts where erfc(x) is the complementary error function. are rewritten in Table II. The two QND measurement When we only consider the maximal total photon num- detectors are identical and the two parties in quantum ber of two, all the different Fock states and corresponding communication holdc ˆ and dˆ, respectively. phase shifts are shown in Table I. We don’t consider the phase difference of microwave pho- ton after it leaves the storage resonator in our scheme, because we just design the principle here. The possible III. ENTANGLEMENT PURIFICATION OF BIT-FLIPPING ERRORS FOR MICROWAVE phase difference can be compensated in practice. PHOTONS When the microwave-photon pairs in the state Φ† c1d1 Φ† c2d2 pass through the parity-check QND de- tectors,| i | thei state of the composite system composed of A. Entanglement purification protocol for ˆ ˆ microwave-photon pairs the two microwave-photon pairs (ˆc1d1 andc ˆ2d2) and the two probe lights (ˆc and dˆ) becomes Let us assume that the nonlocal microwave-photon 1 pairs in quantum communication are in the mixed state = ( H c1 H d1 H c2 H d2 ⇒ 2{ | i | i | i | i ρˆcd described by iθ1 iθ1 + V c V d V c V d ) αe c αe d | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i | i iθ2 iθ2 ρˆcd = f Φ† cd Φ† + (1 f) Ψ† cd Ψ† , (11) + H c H d V c V d αe c αe d | i h | − | i h | | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i 5

Ùout Ùin Ùout Ùin Ùin Ùout Ùin b b = b b b b = b Ùout 2 2 1 1 a a 1 1 2 b2 XX XX

TLR B TLR B

QND N N N N QND

Alice TLR A TLR A Bob cÙ PBS PBS cÙ dÙ PBS PBS dÙ 1 H 1 1 H 1 S1 V V ideal sources cÙ PBS PBS cÙ dÙ PBS PBS dÙ 2 H 2 2 H 2 +/- S2 +/- V V

FIG. 3: Schematic diagram for the entanglement purification on two microwave-photon pairs. S1 and S2 are the two identical ideal entanglement sources for microwave-photon pairs. Two dashed boxes are two same-polarization parity-check QND detectors. PBS represents a polarizing beam splitter for microwave photons. The circles with a circular arrow stands for circulators. The QND measurement is given in Fig. 2. Two rectangular boxes labeled with +/− signs are two measurements 1 with the two diagonal bases {|±i = √2 (|Hi ± |V i)}.

iθ0 iθ0 + V c V d H c H d αe c αe d . (13) Another state Ψ† c d Φ† c d α c α d is evolved to | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i } | i 1 1| i 2 2| i | i

1 iθ0 iθ1 = V c H d H c H d αe c αe d When Alice and Bob obtain a phase shift with θ1 ⇒ 2{| i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i on their coherent states after the homodyne detec- iθ2 iθ1 + H c1 V d1 V c2 V d2 αe c αe d tions, the state will collapse to ( H c H d H c H d + | i | i | i | i | i | i 1 1 2 2 iθ1 iθ2 | i | i | i | i + V c H d V c V d αe c αe d V c1 V d1 V c2 V d2). For the last two terms, there | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i | i | i | i | i iθ1 iθ0 are two situations. If θ2 = θ0 +2π, the last two terms + H c1 V d1 H c2 H d2 αe c αe d . (15) have the same phase shifts. At this point, both Al- | i | i | i | i | i | i } and Bob obtain the phase shift θ0 on their coher- From these two results, with the situation θ2 = ent states, the state becomes ( H c H d V c V d + θ0 + 2π, one can see that if Alice and Bob ob- | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 V c1 V d1 H c2 H d2). Subsequently, Alice and Bob can tain the phase shifts θ0 and θ1 with a homodyne | i | i | i | i ˆ perform a bit-flipping operationσ ˆx = H V + V H measurement on their probe lightsc ˆ and d, the | ih | | ih | ˆ ˆ onc ˆ1 and dˆ1, respectively, and then they can obtain the state of the two microwave-photon pairsc ˆ1d1cˆ2d2 be- comes ( H c H d V c H d + V c V d H c V d ) or state ( H c1 H d1 H c2 H d2 + V c1 V d1 V c2 V d2). If | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i ( V c H d H c H d + H c V d V c V d ). As Al- the θ2 = θ0 + 2π, Alice and Bob will obtain the dif- | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 ferent results,6 they will make no operation. To get the ice and Bob cannot determine on which pair a bit-flipping state Φ† cd, Alice and Bob make a measurement with error occurs, they discard both photon pairs in these two | i 1 the diagonal basis = ( H V ) onc ˆ2 and situations. With the situation θ2 = θ0 +2π, Alice and {|±i √2 | i ± | i } Bob get the different results for6 all the terms. They dˆ , respectively. When both their results are + or 2 | i should also discard all these situations. , the state of the microwave-photon pairc ˆ dˆ be- |−i 1 1 After the microwave-photon pairs pass through comes Φ† cd. Otherwise, they should make the opera- | i the QND detectors, the state of the system tionσ ˆz = H H V V on the microwave photonc ˆ | ih | − | ih | 1 Ψ† c1d1 Ψ† c2d2 α c α d turns to to obtain the state Φ† c1d1 . | i | i | i | i | i 1 After the QND measurement process, the state of the = ( V c1 H d1 V c2 H d2 system Φ† c1d1 Ψ† c2d2 α c α d becomes ⇒ 2{ | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i iθ1 iθ1 + H c V d H c V d ) αe c αe d | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i | i iθ0 iθ2 1 + V c1 H d1 H c2 V d2 αe c αe d iθ2 iθ1 | i | i | i | i | i | i = H c1 H d1 V c2 H d2 αe c αe d iθ2 iθ0 2 + H c1 V d1 V c2 H d2 αe c αe d . (16) ⇒ {| i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i } iθ0 iθ1 + V c V d H c V d αe c αe d | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i The result is similar to that in the situation with no iθ1 iθ2 + H c H d H c V d αe c αe d | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i bit-flipping error expressed in Eq. (13). Due to the in- iθ1 iθ0 + V c V d V c H d αe c αe d . (14) distinguishability with the situation with no bit-flipping | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2| i | i } 6

shifts are given in Table III. We assume all the four angles TABLE III: Corresponding relation between the states of are different in this section. the signal light in storage resonators and the phase shifts by choosing two same cross-Kerr systems in each QND detector. First, we consider the case where there is a pair of polarization-spatial entangled microwave photons. This State |aˆ1i|aˆ2i Total phase shift time, it is just an ideal microwave-photon pair. After it |0i|0i θ0 passes through the QND detectors, the state composed |1i|0i/|0i|1i θ1 of the microwave-photon pair and the probe light is given |1i|1i θ2 by

|2i|0i/|0i|2i θ3 iθ1 iθ1 = (ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 αe c αe d ⇒ 1H 1H 2V 2V | i| i | i iθ0 iθ0 +(ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 αe c αe d. (18) 1V 1V 2H 2H | i| i | i errors, Alice and Bob should keep their photon pairs When Alice and Bob get the same phase shift θ1 via X for the next round. That is, if Alice and Bob get the an homodyne measurement on their probe lights, phase shift θ , they obtain the state of the two photon they obtain the state of their microwave-photon pair 1 ˆ ˆ pairs ( V c H d V c H d + H c V d H c V d ). If (ˆc1†H d1†H +c ˆ2†V d2†V ) 0 . After passing through the cou- | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i 1| i 1| i 2| i 2 | i they both get the phase shift θ0 (condition θ2 = plers, their photon pair will appear at the modesc ˆ2dˆ2. θ0 + 2π), they get the state ( V c1 H d1 H c2 V d2 + When Alice and Bob get the same phase shift θ0, they | i | i | i | i ˆ ˆ H c1 V d1 V c2 H d2). Therefore, they make an oper- obtain the state (ˆc1†V d1†V +c ˆ2†H d2†H ) 0 , and then their | i | i | i | i ˆ | i ationσ ˆx = V H + H V onc ˆ2 and d2 to obtain the photon pair will appear at the output modesc ˆ dˆ . | ih | | ih | 1 1 state ( V c1 H d1 V c2 H d2 + H c1 V d1 H c2 V d2). When the bit-flipping error occurs, the state becomes | i | i | i | i | i | i | i | i Subsequently, Alice and Bob make a measurement with (ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 . With the QND 1 ˆ 1V 1H 2H 2V 1H 1V 2V 2H | i the diagonal basis = ( H V ) onc ˆ2 and d2. measurement, the state of the photon pair evolves to {|±i √2 | i ± | i } If they both obtain the results + or , the state of iθ0 iθ1 ˆ | i |−i = (ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 αe c αe d microwave-photon pairsc ˆ1d1 becomes Ψ† c1d1. Other- ⇒ 1V 1H 2H 2V | i| i | i | i iθ1 iθ0 wise, they should make the operationσ ˆz = H H +(ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 αe c αe d. (19) | ih |− 1H 1V 2V 2H | i| i | i V V on the microwave photonc ˆ1 to obtain the state | ih | Alice and Bob will get the different results θ and θ . Ψ† c1d1 . 0 1 | Afteri the operations, Alice and Bob can obtain their They should perform a bit-flip operation of polarization nonlocal entangled state of microwave-photon pairs with σˆx = V H + H V on photonc ˆ1 to obtain the state ˆ | ih |ˆ | ih | more purity. In the ideal model, the fidelity of the re- (ˆcH† dH† +ˆcV† dV† ) 0 . maining microwave-photon pairs is given by Second, we consider| i the case where there are two pairs of polarization-spatial entangled microwave pho- f 2 tons. With no decoherence, the state of the two pho- fideal = 2 2 . (17) f + (1 f) ton pairs is expressed as (ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† + − 1H 1H 1V 1V 2H 2H ˆ 2 cˆ2†V d2†V ) 0 . After the QND measurements are per- formed by| i Alice and Bob, the state of the whole system composed of the photon pair and the probe lights is B. Entanglement purification for

polarization-spatial entangled microwave-photon 2 2 iθ3 iθ3 = [(ˆc† dˆ† ) +(ˆc† dˆ† ) ] 0 αe c αe d pairs ⇒ 1H 1H 2V 2V | i| i | i iθ2 iθ2 +2ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† 0 αe c αe d 1H 1H 2V 2V | i| i | i 2 iθ0 iθ0 The polarization-spatial entangled states are widely +(ˆc† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 αe c αe d 1V 1V 2H 2H | i| i | i used in quantum communication as they can be produced ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ by parametric down-conversion naturally in experiment. +2(ˆc1†H d1†H +ˆc2†V d2†V )(ˆc1†V d1†V +ˆc2†H d2†H ) iθ1 iθ1 Therefore, considering the situation for polarization- 0 αe c αe d. (20) spatial entangled microwave-photon pairs is very - ⊗| i| i | i essary. For a pair polarization-spatial entangled mi- Alice and Bob will get four results with θ0, θ1, θ2, ˆ ˆ and θ3 which correspond to the states (ˆc† dˆ† + crowave photons, the state is given by (ˆc1†H d1†H +ˆc1†V d1†V + 1V 1V 2 ˆ ˆ cˆ† dˆ† ) 0 , (ˆc† dˆ† +c ˆ† dˆ† )(ˆc† dˆ† +c ˆ† dˆ† ) 0 , cˆ2†H d2†H +c ˆ2†V d2†V ) 0 . Therefore, for the four-photon 2H 2H 1H 1H 2V 2V 1V 1V 2H 2H | i | i 2 2 | i ˆ ˆ ˆ cˆ† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† 0 , and (ˆc† dˆ† ) +(ˆc† dˆ† ) 0 , respec- state, it can be described by (ˆc1†H d1†H +ˆc1†V d1†V +ˆc2†H d2†H + 1H 1H 2V 2V | i 1H 1H 2V 2V | i 2 tively. After the photons pass through the couplers, cˆ† dˆ† ) 0 . The detailed schematic diagram of our EPP 2V 2V | i ˆ 2 ˆ 2 ˆ for those two situations is shown in Fig. 4. Here the states the states [(ˆc1†H d1†H ) + (ˆc2†V d2†V ) ] 0 and (ˆc1†V d1†V + 2 | i † ˆ† ˆ ˆ H and V are translated to 1 and 0 inc ˆ1dˆ1 mode, re- cˆ2H d2H ) 0 will appear atc ˆ2d2 andc ˆ1d1, respectively. | i | i | i | i | i ˆ ˆ ˆ spectively. Inc ˆ2dˆ2 mode, the corresponding relations are The two photon pairs (ˆc1†H d1†H +c ˆ2†V d2†V )(ˆc1†V d1†V + ˆ ˆ ˆ opposite. Here, we choose the two same cross-Kerr sys- cˆ2†H d2†H ) 0 will be divided intoc ˆ1d1 andc ˆ2d2, respec- tems in each QND detector and the corresponding phase tively. | i 7

bÙout bÙin = bÙout bÙin Ùin Ùout = Ùin Ùout 2 2 1 1 a a b1 b1 b2 b2 XX XX

TLR B TLR B

Alice QND N N N N QND Bob

TLR A TLR A c Coupler c PBS PBS c dÙ PBS PBS dÙ Coupler dÙ Ù1 Ù1 H Ù1 1 H 1 1 PBS V V PBS S c c PBS PBS c dÙ PBS PBS dÙ dÙ Ù2 Ù2 H Ù2 2 H 2 2 V V

FIG. 4: Schematic diagram of our EPP for polarization-spatial entangled microwave-photon pairs. S is the entanglement source for generating polarization-spatial entangled microwave-photon pairs. The two big dashed boxes are two polarization parity-check QND detectors. The two small dashed boxes are two couplers with the same PBS for microwave photons.

When the bit-flipping error occurs, there will be two evolve to situations. The first situation is that only one of two 2 2 iθ3 iθ0 microwave-photon pairs has an error, and the state of the = [(ˆc† dˆ† ) +(ˆc† dˆ† ) ] 0 αe c αe d ⇒ 1H 1V 2V 2H | i| i | i † ˆ† † ˆ† † ˆ† iθ2 iθ0 two photon pairs becomes (ˆc1H d1H +ˆc1V d1V +ˆc2H d2H + +2ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† 0 αe c αe d ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ 1H 1V 2V 2H | i| i | i cˆ2†V d2†V )(ˆc1†V d1†H +ˆc1†H d1†V +ˆc2†V d2†H +ˆc2†H d2†V ) 0 . There- 2 2 iθ0 iθ3 | i +[(ˆc† dˆ† ) +(ˆc† dˆ† ) ] 0 αe c αe d fore, with the QND detector, the composite system com- 1V 1H 2H 2V | i| i | i iθ0 iθ2 posed of the two photon pairs and the two probe lights +2ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† 0 αe c αe d 1V 1H 2H 2V | i| i | i evolves to ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ +2(ˆc1†V d1†H +ˆc2†H d2†V )(ˆc1†H d1†V +ˆc2†V d2†H ) iθ1 iθ1 0 αe c αe d. (22) = (ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† ) ⊗| i| i | i ⇒ 1H 1H 1V 1H 2V 2V 2H 2V iθ1 iθ3 0 αe c αe d Alice and Bob get the five results in which four results ⊗| i| i | i have different phase shifts and the other has the same +(ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† ) 1H 1H 2H 2V 2V 2V 1V 1H phase shift. For the different phase shifts, they should iθ1 iθ2 0 αe c αe d discard the photon pairs because the pairs will appear ⊗| i| i | i +(ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† +ˆc† dˆ† cˆ† dˆ† ) in the same spatial mode. When Alice and Bob get the 1H 1H 1H 1V 2V 2V 2V 2H same phase shift, they cannot distinguish it from the situ- iθ3 iθ1 0 αe c αe d ⊗| i| i | i ation with no error and they should keep the pairs. Then ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ +(ˆc1†H d1†H cˆ2†V d2†H +ˆc2†V d2†V cˆ1†H d1†V ) Alice and Bob can continue to purify the states by us- iθ2 iθ1 ing the protocol presented for ideal entanglement sources 0 αe c αe d ⊗| i| i | i discussed in Sec. III A. ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ +(ˆc1†V d1†V +ˆc2†H d2†H )(ˆc1†V d1†H +ˆc2†H d2†V ) iθ0 iθ1 0 αe c αe d ⊗| i| i | i C. Parameters and fidelity for quantum ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ +(ˆc1†V d1†V +ˆc2†H d2†H )(ˆc1†H d1†V +ˆc2†V d2†H ) nondemolition detector iθ1 iθ0 0 αe c αe d (21) ⊗| i| i | i The cross-Kerr effect is induced by coupling two TLRs Analyzing from the result in Eq. (21), Alice and Bob to a superconducting molecule as shown in Fig. 1. Ac- know there exists an error in one pair when they get cording to the previous works [19, 56], we choose the pa- the different phase shifts. Alice and Bob should discard rameters of this superconducting system as Ec/2π =0.5 ˆ GHz, EJ /2π = 16 GHz, and Em/2π =0.2 GHz. The two this result because they cannot get the state (ˆc1†H d1†H + ˆ ˆ ˆ coupling strengthes between the molecule and the TLRs cˆ2†V d2†V ) 0 atc ˆ1d1 andc ˆ2d2. are equal with g /2π g /2π 300 MHz. The classical | i 1 ∼ 2 ∼ The second one is the bit-flipping error taking place on pump field strength Ωc and the detuning δ2 are designed both the two microwave photon pairs. The state becomes to Ωc/2π δ2/2π 1.5 GHz. Therefore, the cross-Kerr ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ 2 ∼ ∼ (ˆc1†V d1†H +ˆc1†H d1†V +ˆc2†V d2†H +ˆc2†H d2†V ) 0 . When the two effect coefficient in our scheme is χ /2π 2.4 MHz. A pairs pass the QND detectors, the state| ofi the system will recent experiment [59] demonstrated| | a state-dependent∼ 8 shift χsc /2π =2.59 0.06 MHz between two cavities in 1 | | ± circuit QED. |10 According to the parameters chosen above, we calcu- |11 late the angle of the coherent state in Table III. The 0.995 angles of states 00 , 10 / 01 , 11 and 20 / 02 are | i | i | i | i | i | i θ0 = 0, θ1 0.6, θ2 1.2 and θ3 1.1, respectively. ≈ ≈ ≈ 1 Here, we choose the decay rate with κ− 10 ns in our 0.99 2 ≈ calculation. If we require that the minimal error proba- Fidelity bility is less than 0.01, according to the Eq. (10), then Xd should satisfy Xd > 4.5. Therefore, when the α satisfies 0.985 α > 24.7, all the angles can be distinguished. Here, the cross-Kerr effect is weak, the phase shifts in Table II can not satisfy the condition θ2 = θ0 +2π. Therefore, in this 0.98 physical system, Alice and Bob should make operations 5 10 15 20 25 1/ (ns) under the situation with different phase shifts. 2

1 FIG. 6: The fidelity of the state in the storage resonators with dissipation for different decay rates of the readout res- 1 onators κ2− . Here the decay rate of the storage resonators is 1 0.995 κ1− ∼ 20 µs. |10 |11 0.99

Fidelity resonators at the end of the measuring time. In the rotat- ing frame, the Hamiltonian of the resonator is zero. We 0.985 choose the total measuring time of the cascade system with τ 8/κ2. The decay rate of the readout resonator ∼1 keeps κ2− 10 ns in the whole process. The fidelities are ∼ 1 0.98 proportional to κ1− in Fig. 5, which indicates that the 10 20 30 40 50 60 large storage time (the better resonator) can protect the 1/ ( s) 1 microwave photons from dissipation. Then we plot the influences from the different κ2 in Fig. 6. The parame- 1 FIG. 5: The fidelity of the state in the storage resonators ter here is κ1− 20µs. Contrary to Fig. 5, the fidelities 1 ∼ 1 with dissipation for different decay rates κ1− . Here the decay are inversely proportional to κ2− in Fig. 6. The large 1 1 1 rate of the readout resonators is κ2− ∼ 10 ns. κ2− means a long measuring time. Therefore, as κ2− be- comes large, it will result in more total dissipation and the fidelity becomes lower. In practice, the number of microwave photons will de- crease due to the dissipation of storage resonators. The dynamics of the quantum system with dissipation is de- IV. SUMMARY scribed by the master equation in Lindblad form given by In summary, we have proposed a physically feasible polarization EPP for the entangled state of nonlocal mi- dρˆ(t) ˆ ˆ ˆ =i ρˆ(t), H +κ1L [ˆa1]ˆρ(t)+κ1L [ˆa2]ˆρ(t), (23) crowave photons in circuit QED. Our EPP includes two dt h i processes. The first process is used to purify the po- whereρ ˆ(t) and Hˆ are the and the Hamil- larization entanglement state generated by the ideal en- tonian of the system, respectively. The symbols κ1 rep- tanglement sources and the second process is used for resents the decay rates of TLR A. The superoperator Lˆ polarization-spatial entangled microwave-photon pairs. with the rule Lˆ[ˆo]ˆρ = (2ˆoρˆoˆ† oˆ†oˆρˆ ρˆoˆ†oˆ)/2 represents In our EPP, we design the polarization parity-check the influence of the dissipation.− Here,− we assume that QND detectors to realize the postselection of microwave- the QND measurement is ideal and that the probe light photon quantum states. According to the phase shifts of has no influence on the states in storage resonators. The the probe light hold by the two remote parties in quan- fidelity is influenced by the leakage of the resonator. The tum communication, say Alice and Bob, the parties can formula of fidelity is F = ψid ρˆ(t) ψid , where the ideal distinguish whether the error takes place and then cor- h | | i state ψid is the initial state here. We consider the two rect it. We implement the QND measurement based on initial| statesi with 10 and 11 . State nm represents n the cross-Kerr effect induced by coupling the two TLRs | i | i | i and m photons in storage resonator A1 and A2, respec- to a superconducting molecule. Our work can improve tively. We calculate the fidelities of the states in storage the practical application of microwave-based quantum 9 communication. For example, quantum repeaters are entangled microwave-photon state to improve its fidelity. the indispensable parts in long-distance quantum com- munication. Due to the unavoidable influence of the en- vironment in the processes of transmission and storage, the nonlocal near maximally entangled state generated ACKNOWLEDGMENTS between every two neighboring nodes and used as the in a quantum repeater may turn into a mixed entangled state. Therefore, our purification pro- We thank Guan-Yu Wang, Jing Qiu, and Zhi-Sheng tocol can be used here. Also, in the actual situation of Yang for helpful discussions. This work is supported satellite quantum communication, when the microwave by the National Natural Science Foundation of China signals pass through the aerosphere from the quantum under Grants No. 11674033, No. 11474026, and No. satellite to the ground, the pure maximally entangled 11474027, the Fundamental Research Funds for the microwave-photon state may become the mixed one due Central Universities under Grant No. 2015KJJCA01, to the influence of environment in the process of satellite and the National Key Basic Research Program of China quantum communication. To keep the communication ef- under Grant No. 2013CB922000. ficient, the parties can use our EPP to purify the mixed

[1] C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, tum Key Distribution Over a Collective-Noise Channel, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Teleporting an Un- Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 017901 (2004). known via Dual Classical and Einstein- [14] J. C. Boileau, R. Laflamme, M. Laforest, and C. Podolsky-Rosen Channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 R. Myers, Robust Quantum Communication Using a (1993). Polarization-Entangled Photon Pair, Phys. Rev. Lett. [2] C. H. Bennett and S. J. Wiesner, Communication via 93, 220501 (2004). One- and Two-Particle Operators on Einstein-Podolsky- [15] C. H. Bennett, H. J. Bernstein, S. Popescu, and B. Schu- Rosen states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2881 (1992). macher, Concentrating partial entanglement by local op- [3] X. S. Liu, G. L. Long, D. M. Tong, and F. Li, Gen- erations, Phys. Rev. A 53, 2046 (1996). eral scheme for between multiparties, [16] Y. B. Sheng, F. G. Deng, and H. Y. Zhou, Nonlocal en- Phys. Rev. A 65, 022304 (2002). tanglement concentration scheme for partially entangled [4] A. K. Ekert, Quantum Based on Bell’s multipartite systems with nonlinear optics, Phys. Rev. A Theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991). 77, 062325 (2008). [5] C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and N. D. Mermin, Quantum [17] B. C. Ren, F. F. Du, and F. G. Deng, Hyperentanglement Cryptography Without Bell’s Theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. concentration for two-photon four-qubit systems with lin- 68, 557 (1992). ear optics, Phys. Rev. A 88, 012302 (2013). [6] X. H. Li, F. G. Deng, and H. Y. Zhou, Efficient quantum [18] X. H. Li and S. Ghose, Hyperentanglement concentra- key distribution over a collective noise channel, Phys. tion for time-bin and polarization hyperentangled pho- Rev. A 78, 022321 (2008). tons, Phys. Rev. A 91, 062302 (2015). [7] M. Hillery, V. Buˇzek, and A. Berthiaume, Quantum se- [19] H. Zhang and H. Wang, Entanglement concentration of cret sharing, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1829 (1999). microwave photons based on the Kerr effect in circuit [8] G. L. Long and X. S. Liu, Theoretically efficient high- QED, Phys. Rev. A 95, 052314 (2017). capacity quantum-key-distribution scheme, Phys. Rev. A [20] C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, 65, 032302 (2002). J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Purification of [9] F. G. Deng, G. L. Long, and X. S. Liu, Two-step quan- Noise Entanglement and Faithful Teleportation via Noisy tum direct communication protocol using the Einstein- Channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722 (1996). Podolsky-Rosen pair block, Phys. Rev. A 68, 042317 [21] D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. (2003). Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Quantum Privacy Amplifica- [10] C. Wang, F. G. Deng, Y. S. Li, X. S. Liu, and G. L. tion and the Security of over Long, Quantum secure direct communication with high- Noisy Channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2818 (1996). dimension quantum superdense coding, Phys. Rev. A 71, [22] J. W. Pan, C. Simon, C. Brukner, and A. Zelinger, En- 044305 (2005). tanglement purification for quantum communication, Na- [11] W. Zhang, D. S. Ding, Y. B. Sheng, L. Zhou, B. S. Shi, ture (London) 410, 1067 (2001). and G. C Guo, Quantum secure direct communication [23] C. Simon and J.W. Pan, Polarization Entanglement Pu- with , Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 220501 rification using Spatial Entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2017). 89, 257901 (2002). [12] Z. D. Walton, A. F. Abouraddy, A. V. Sergienko, B. E. A. [24] J. W. Pan, S. Gasparoni, R. Ursin, G. Weihs, and Saleh, and M. C. Teich, Decoherence-Free Fubspaces in A. Zeilinger, Experimental entanglement purification of Quantum Key Distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 087901 arbitrary unknown states, Nature (London) 423, 417 (2003). (2003). [13] J. C. Boileau, D. Gottesman, R. Laflamme, D. Poulin, [25] Y. B. Sheng, F. G. Deng, and H. Y. Zhou, Efficient and R. W. Spekkens, Robust Polarization-Based Quan- polarization-entanglement purification based on para- 10

metric down-conversion sources with cross-Kerr nonlin- Wallraff, Implementation of a Toffoli gate with supercon- earity, Phys. Rev. A 77, 042308 (2008). ducting circuits, Nature (London) 481, 170 (2012). [26] Y. B. Sheng and F. G. Deng, Deterministic entangle- [44] M. D. Reed, L. DiCarlo, S. E. Nigg, L. Sun, L. Frun- ment purification and complete nonlocal Bell-state anal- zio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Realization of ysis with hyperentangledment, Phys. Rev. A 81, 032307 three-qubit with superconduct- (2010). ing circuits, Nature (London) 482, 382 (2012). [27] Y. B. Sheng and F. G. Deng, One-step deterministic [45] R. Vijay, C. Macklin, D. H. Slichter, S. J. Weber, K. W. polarization-entanglement purification using spatial en- Murch, R. Naik, A. N. Korotkov, and I. Siddiqi, Stabi- tanglement, Phys. Rev. A 82, 044305 (2010). lizing Rabi oscillations in a superconducting qubit using [28] X. H. Li, Deterministic polarization-entanglement pu- quantum feedback, Nature (London) 490, 77 (2012). rification using spatial entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 82, [46] F. W. Strauch, All-resonant control of superconducting 044304 (2010). resonators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 210501 (2012). [29] F. G. Deng, One-step error correction for multipartite po- [47] D. I. Schuster, A. A. Houck, J. A. Schreier, A. Wallraff, larization entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 83, 062316 (2011). J. M. Gambetta, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, J. Majer, B. John- [30] B. C. Ren, F. F. Du, and F. G. Deng, Two-step hy- son, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, perentanglement purification with the quantum-state- Resolving photon number states in a superconducting cir- joining method, Phys. Rev. A 90, 052309 (2014). cuit, Nature (London) 445, 515 (2007). [31] G. Y. Wang, Q. Liu, and F. G. Deng, Hyperentanglement [48] A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Gambetta, J. A. Schreier, purification for two-photon six-qubit quantum systems, B. R. Johnson, J. M. Chow, L. Frunzio, J. Majer, M. H. Phys. Rev. A 94, 032319 (2016). Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Generating [32] C. Wang, Y. Zhang, and G. S. Jin, Entanglement purifi- single microwave photons in a circuit, Nature (London) cation and concentration of - entangled states 449, 328 (2007). using quantum-dot spins in optical microcavities, Phys. [49] J. Majer, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, J. Koch, B. R. Rev. A 84, 032307 (2011). Johnson, J. A. Schreier, L. Frunzio, D. I. Schuster, A. [33] Y. B. Sheng and L. Zhou, Deterministic polarization A. Houck, A. Wallraff, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. entanglement purification using time-bin entanglement, Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Coupling superconducting Laser Phys. Lett. 11, 085203 (2014). qubits via a cavity bus, Nature (London) 449, 443 (2007). [34] Y. B. Sheng and L. Zhou, Deterministic entanglement [50] M. Hofheinz, E. M. Weig, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, distillation for secure double-server blind quantum com- E. Lucero, M. Neeley, A. D. O’Connel, H. Wang, J. M. putation, Sci. Rep. 5, 7815 (2015). Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Generation of Fock states [35] R. F. Werner, Quantum states with Einstein-Podolsky- in a superconducting quantum circuit, Nature (London) Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model, 454, 310 (2008). Phys. Rev. A 40, 4277 (1989). [51] B. R. Johnson, M. D. Reed, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, [36] A. Blais, R. S. Huang, A. Wallraff, S. M. Girvin, and Lev S. Bishop, E. Ginossar, J. M. Gambetta, L. DiCarlo, R. J. Schoelkopf, Cavity for L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin and R. J. Schoelkopf, Quantum superconducting electrical circuits: An architecture for non-demolition detection of single microwave photons in quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 69, 062320 (2004). a circuit, Nat. Phys. 6, 663 (2010). [37] A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, R. S. [52] M. Hua, M. J. Tao, and F. G. Deng, Universal quantum Huang, J. Majer, S. Kumar, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. gates on microwave photons assisted by circuit quantum Schoelkopf, Strong coupling of a single photon to a super- electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. A 90, 012328 (2014). conducting qubit using circuit quantum electrodynamics, [53] A. Narla, S. Shankar, M. Hatridge, Z. Leghtas, K. M. Nature (London) 431, 162 (2004). Sliwa, E. Zalys-Geller, S. O. Mundhada, W. Pfaff, L. [38] A. Blais, J. Gambetta, A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, S. M. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret, Robust Girvin, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Quantum- Concurrent Remote Entanglement Between Two Super- information processing with circuit quantum electrody- conducting Qubits, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031036 (2016). namics, Phys. Rev. A 75, 032329 (2007). [54] S. Rebi´c, J. Twamley, and G. J. Milburn, Giant Kerr [39] L. DiCarlo, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, Lev S. Bishop, nonlinearities in circuit quantum electrodynamics, Phys. B. R. Johnson, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, L. Frun- Rev. Lett. 103, 150503 (2009). zio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Demonstration [55] S. Kumar and D. P. DiVincenzo, Exploiting Kerr cross of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum nonlinearity in circuit quantum electrodynamics for non- processor, Nature (London) 460, 240 (2009). demolition measurements, Phys. Rev. B 82, 014512 [40] Y. Cao, W. Y. Huo, Q. Ai, and G. L. Long, Theory of (2010). degenerate three-wave mixing using circuit QED in solid- [56] Y. Hu, G. Q. Ge, S. Chen, X. F. Yang, and Y. L. Chen, state circuits, Phys. Rev. A 84, 053846 (2011). Cross-Kerr-effect induced by coupled Josephson qubits [41] H. Wang, M. Mariantoni, R. C. Bialczak, M. Lenander, in circuit quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. A 84, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, A. D. O’Connell, D. Sank, M. Wei- 012329 (2011). des, J. Wenner, T. Yamamoto, Y. Yin, J. Zhao, J. M. [57] G. Kirchmair, B. Vlastakis, Z. Leghtas, S. E. Nigg, H. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Deterministic entanglement Paik, E. Ginossar, M. Mirrahimi, L. Frunzio, S. M. of photons in two superconducting microwave resonators, Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf. Observation of quantum Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 060401 (2011). state collapse and revival due to the single-photon Kerr [42] Y. Hu and L. Tian, Deterministic generation of entangled effect, Nature (London) 495, 205 (2013). photons in superconducting resonator arrays, Phys. Rev. [58] I. C. Hoi, A. F. Kockum, T. Palomaki, T. M. Stace, B. Lett. 106, 257002 (2011). Fan, L. Tornberg, S. R. Sathyamoorthy, G. Johansson, [43] A. Fedorov, L. Steffen, M. Baur, M. P. da Silva, and A. P. Delsing, and C. M. Wilson, Giant cross-Kerr effect for 11

propagating microwaves induced by an artificial atom, [63] J. Siewert, R. Fazio, G. M. Palma, and E. Sciacca, As- Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 053601 (2013). pects of qubit dynamics in the presence of leakage, J. [59] E. T. Holland, B. Vlastakis, R. W. Heeres, M. J. Reagor, Low Temp. Phys. 118, 795 (2000). U. Vool, Z. Leghtas, L. Frunzio, G. Kirchmair, M. H. [64] A. Imamoˇglu, H. Schmidt, G. Woods, and M. Deutsch, Devoret, M. Mirrahimi and R. J. Schoelkopf, Single- Strongly Interacting Photons in a Nonlinear Cavity, photon-resolved cross-Kerr interaction for autonomous Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1467 (1997). stabilization of photon-number states, Phys. Rev. Lett. [65] D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, 115, 180501 (2015). (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994). [60] J. M. Hao, Y. Yuan, L. X. Ran, T. Jiang, J. A. Kong, [66] K. Lalumi`ere, B. C. Sanders, A. F. van Loo, A. Fedorov, C. T. Chan, and L. Zhou, Manipulating electromagnetic A. Wallraff, and A. Blais, Input-output theory for waveg- wave polarizations by anisotropic metamaterials, Phys. uide QED with an ensemble of inhomogeneous atoms, Rev. Lett. 99, 063908 (2007). Phys. Rev. A 88, 043806 (2013). [61] D. R. Solli, C. F. McCormick, R. Y. Chiao, and J. [67] K. Nemoto and W. J. Munro, Nearly Deterministic Lin- M. Hickmann, Photonic crystal polarizers and polariz- ear Optical Controlled-NOT Gate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, ing beam splitters, J. Appl. Phys. 93, 9429 (2003). 250502 (2004). [62] J. Koch, T. M. Yu, J. M. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. [68] S. D. Barrett, P. Kok, K. Nemoto, R. G. Beausoleil, W. J. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Munro, and T. P. Spiller, Symmetry analyzer for nonde- Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Charge-insensitive qubit structive Bell-state detection using weak nonlinearities, design derived from the Cooper pair box, Phys. Rev. A Phys. Rev. A 71, 060302(R) (2005). 76, 042319 (2007).