English

Comparing and correcting robustness metrics for quantum optimal control

Quantum Physics 2026-03-18 v2

Abstract

Control pulses that nominally optimize fidelity are sensitive to routine hardware drift and modeling errors. Robust quantum optimal control seeks error-insensitive control pulses that maintain fidelity thresholds and obey hardware constraints. Distinct numerical approximations to the first-order error susceptibility include adjoint end-point and toggling-frame approaches. Although theoretically equivalent, we provide a novel, systematic study demonstrating important numerical differences between these two approaches. We also introduce a critical discretization correction to the widely-used toggling-frame robustness estimator, measurably improving its estimate of first-order error susceptibility. We accomplish our study by positioning robustness as a first-class objective within direct, constrained optimal control. Our approach uniquely handles control and fidelity constraints while cleanly isolating robustness for dedicated optimization. In both single- and two-qubit examples under realistic constraints, our approach provides an analytic edge for obtaining precise, physics-informed robustness.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2602.10349,
  title  = {Comparing and correcting robustness metrics for quantum optimal control},
  author = {Andrew T. Kamen and Samuel Fine and Bikrant Bhattacharyya and Frederic T. Chong and Andy J. Goldschmidt},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.10349},
  year   = {2026}
}

Comments

11 pages, 7 figures

R2 v1 2026-07-01T10:30:51.536Z