Talk:Superconducting quantum computing

Page rewritten. Srjmas (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Quantum Information Science and Engineering

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): WISE Physics, Mauryan11 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Lkabasakalian, Lwingerter, Shaanvi D.

— Assignment last updated by Za49 (talk) 06:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Qubit Lifetime Improvements.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:53, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

anharmocity

Is the term " anharmocity " in the paragraph on the Unimon a typo? If not, it may need a definition. Disu56 (talk) 08:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I am not the author of that text, but "anharmonicity" is indeed a real term used in the context of superconducting qubits and other quantum information processing systems. It can mean the the deviation of a system's potential energy landscape from an ideal quantum harmonic oscillator (QHO). A QHO has equal energy spacings between all of its levels. Thus, for a qubit whose potential deviates from a QHO, "anharmonicity" can also mean the difference in the energy gaps between the $|0\rangle$--$|1\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$--$|2\rangle$ transitions. QB2k (talk) 21:42, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

This makes sense, it would be useful to have that explanation in the text! Disu56 (talk) 00:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, also not the original author, but I've reworded it a bit to be more clear and add a simplified definition of anharmonicity and a link to the more general anharmonicity wiki. @QB2k if you would like to look over it, please let me know what you think as well Electronblues (talk) 02:58, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

definitely and improvement - thanks! Disu56 (talk) 03:07, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Electronblues, I think your edits have definitely helped. By the way, I see that you created a much-needed page for Josephson junctions. I love that! I'm also a big fan of how you started an article on TWPAs. You are inspiring me to be more engaged here!! QB2k (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Please do, we need it, the quantum computing wiki pages are filled with original research and obtuse explanations as it stands.

I have reorganized the article to help with some of the issues. I would appreciate any commentary you all have; I'll make a new talk post on it. Electronblues (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Reorganization and ongoing issues

I have reorganized the article to hopefully address @Wwallacee's cleanup tag. I have tried to maintain as much as possible of the original content in the article. The major changes are as follows:

1. "Journey of quantum computing" --> new "History" section,
2. Qubit archetypes split into 2 sections, (i) Phase/flux/charge ('canonical' qubit types) (ii) hybridizations (transmon, fluxonium, etc.)
3. "Single Qubits / Coupling Qubits / qubit readout" sections --> new "Operation and readout" section, (** readout should become its own section, perhaps readout and measurement, if more information is added but right now it does not have enough information)
4. "DiVincenzo's criteria + Challenges and developments" -> "Performance and challenges" section,
5. Removed the “Recent advances in Josephson Junction–based QPUs” as it is AI-generated and does not fit the flow. Removed the "Future of quantum computing" as it appears to be WP:OR.

I hope that this has allowed the article to be more easily understood and better formatted. please let me know if there is any feedback or you see ongoing areas of improvement.

I did not remove the second cleanup tag as I believe this issue is ongoing. I see a few major issues with the article as it still stands. The major ones are

1. "History": Needs more detail. Maybe something like: Tony Leggett -> Martinis/Clarke/Devoret experiments -> 1999 first charge qubit -> 2000s phase/flux qubits -> transmon qubit -> establishment of IBM and Google, early results -> "NISQ" era
2. "Background" section is not understandable to a general audience and lacks citations. It should probably go something like this: "Qubits" -> "Superconductivity & Josephson effect" -> "LC circuits/Electrical circuits as qubits" with equations and citations.
3. "Hardware and technology" should include info on couplers/readout and dilution fridges
4. Need an actual discussion of measurement and readout

This list is just my opinion, so if anyone has comments on the reorganization or other things they want to see, I wanted to make this talk post so that we can discuss how to improve this article, especially since it is such a growing field at the moment. Electronblues (talk) 23:35, 9 February 2026 (UTC)