IP Library Granted Patent US 12,190,203
Granted Patent B2
US 12,190,203 · App. 18/385,226 · Granted Jan 7, 2025

System and methods for achieving orthogonal control of non-orthogonal qubit parameters

Inventors: Mohammad H. Amin (Coquitlam, CA); Trevor Michael Lanting (Vancouver, CA); Colin Enderud (Vancouver, CA)
Assignee: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
G06N10/00
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,190,203
App. No.
18/385,226
Granted
Jan 7, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Achieving orthogonal control of non-orthogonal qubit parameters of a logical qubit allows for increasing the length of a qubit chain thereby increasing the effective connectivity of the qubit chain. A hybrid qubit is formed by communicatively coupling a dedicated second qubit to a first qubit. By tuning a programmable parameter of the second qubit of a hybrid qubit, an effective programmable parameter of the hybrid qubit is adjusted without affecting another effective programmable parameter of the hybrid qubit thereby achieving orthogonal control of otherwise non-orthogonal qubit parameters. The length of the logical qubit may thus be increased by communicatively coupling a plurality of such hybrid qubits together.

Claims (28)

1. A quantum processor comprising a plurality of hybrid qubits, wherein each hybrid qubit comprises:

a respective first qubit comprising:

a first qubit loop formed by a first closed superconducting current path; and

a compound Josephson junction that interrupts the first qubit loop;

a respective second qubit comprising:

a second qubit loop formed by a second closed superconducting current path;

a first Josephson junction that interrupts the second qubit loop; and

a compound Josephson junction that interrupts the second qubit loop;

a respective first programming subsystem communicatively coupleable to the compound Josephson junction of the respective first qubit;

a respective second programming subsystem communicatively coupleable to the first qubit loop of the respective first qubit; and

a respective third programming subsystem communicatively coupleable to the compound Josephson junction of the respective second qubit,

wherein the second qubit loop of the respective second qubit is galvanically coupled to the first qubit loop of the respective first qubit such that a portion of the second closed superconducting current path includes a portion of the first closed superconducting current path and is shared between the first and second closed superconducting current paths and wherein the first Josephson junction that interrupts the second qubit loop interrupts the portion of the second closed superconducting current path that is shared between the first and second closed superconducting current paths.

2. The quantum processor of claim 1 wherein each respective second qubit further comprises a second Josephson junction that interrupts the second qubit loop, and wherein the second Josephson junction that interrupts the second qubit loop interrupts a portion of the second closed superconducting current path that is not shared between the first and second closed superconducting current paths.

3. The quantum processor of claim 1 wherein each respective first qubit comprises a respective first programmable parameter that is controlled by the respective first programming subsystem communicatively coupleable to the compound Josephson junction of the respective first qubit and a respective second programmable parameter that is controlled by the respective second programming subsystem communicatively coupleable to the first qubit loop of the respective first qubit, and wherein, for each respective first qubit, the respective second programmable parameter at least partially depends on the respective first programmable parameter.

4. The quantum processor of claim 3 wherein each respective second qubit comprises a respective first programmable parameter that is controlled by the respective third programming subsystem communicatively coupleable to the compound Josephson junction of the respective second qubit, and wherein the respective second programmable parameter of each respective first qubit is independent of the respective first programmable parameter of the respective second qubit to which the respective first qubit is galvanically coupled, such that the respective first programmable parameter of each respective second qubit does not affect the respective second programmable parameter of the respective first qubit to which the respective second qubit is galvanically coupled.

5. The quantum processor of claim 3 wherein, for each respective first qubit, the respective first programmable parameter is a respective tunneling amplitude of the respective first qubit and the respective second programmable parameter is a respective persistent current in the first qubit loop of the respective first qubit, and wherein, for each respective second qubit, the respective first programmable parameter is a respective tunneling amplitude of the respective second qubit.

6. The quantum processor of claim 3 wherein each hybrid qubit further comprises:

a respective effective first programmable parameter that at least partially depends on the respective first programmable parameter of the respective first qubit and the respective first programmable parameter of the respective second qubit; and

a respective effective second programmable parameter that at least partially depends on the respective second programmable parameter of the respective first qubit, and

such that each hybrid qubit behaves as a respective logical qubit.

7. The quantum processor of claim 6 wherein, for each respective hybrid qubit, the respective effective first programmable parameter is an effective tunneling amplitude of the respective hybrid qubit and the respective effective second programmable parameter is an effective persistent current of the respective hybrid qubit.

8. The quantum processor of claim 1 , further comprising:

a plurality of coupling devices, wherein each respective coupling device is communicatively coupleable to a respective first qubit in a respective first hybrid qubit and a respective first qubit in a respective second hybrid qubit such that each respective coupling device provides communicative coupling between a respective pair of hybrid qubits.

9. The quantum processor of claim 8 wherein each respective coupling device comprises a respective loop of superconducting material interrupted by at least one respective Josephson junction, and wherein each respective coupling device is communicatively coupleable to a respective first qubit in a respective first hybrid qubit via galvanic or inductive coupling and to a respective first qubit in a respective second hybrid qubit via galvanic or inductive coupling.

10. The quantum processor of claim 9 wherein a first hybrid qubit and a second hybrid qubit are communicatively coupleable via a first coupling device to behave as a first logical qubit comprising:

an effective first programmable parameter that depends on the first programmable parameter of the first qubit in the first hybrid qubit, the first programmable parameter of the second qubit in the first hybrid qubit, the first programmable parameter of the first qubit in the second hybrid qubit, and the first programmable parameter of the second qubit in the second hybrid qubit; and

an effective second programmable parameter that depends on the second programmable parameter of the first qubit in the first hybrid qubit and the second programmable parameter of the first qubit in the second hybrid qubit,

wherein the effective first programmable parameter of the first logical qubit is independent of the effective second programmable parameter of the first logical qubit such that the effective first programmable parameter of the first logical qubit does not affect the effective second programmable parameter of the first logical qubit.

Assignments (4)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 3, 2024
From: AMIN, MOHAMMAD H.S.; LANTING, TREVOR MICHAEL; ENDERUD, COLIN
To: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
Reel/Frame 069462/0600 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Dec 3, 2024
From: DWSI HOLDINGS INC.
To: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
Reel/Frame 069463/0184 →
CONTINUATION Recorded Dec 3, 2024
From: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
To: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
Reel/Frame 069476/0057 →
MERGER Recorded Dec 3, 2024
From: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.; DWSI HOLDINGS INC.
To: DWSI HOLDINGS INC.
Reel/Frame 069476/0070 →
Continuity (5)
Continuation 17234469 · Apr 19, 2021
Division 15641051 · Jul 3, 2017
Division 14339289 · Jul 23, 2014
Provisional Application 61857601 · Jul 23, 2013
Related Publication 20240185104A1 · Jun 6, 2024
References Cited (154)
US 5113352A · Finnerty · 1992 [cited by applicant]
US 6838694B2 · Esteve et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 6988058B1 · Sherwin et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7135701B2 · Amin et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7277872B2 · Raussendorf et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7335909B2 · Amin et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7418283B2 · Amin · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7533068B2 · Maassen et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7619437B2 · Thom et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7624088B2 · Johnson et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7788192B2 · Amin · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7843209B2 · Berkley · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7870087B2 · Macready et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 7876248B2 · Berkley et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 7877333B2 · Macready · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 7984012B2 · Coury et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8008942B2 · Van et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8018244B2 · Berkley · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8032474B2 · Macready et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8035540B2 · Berkley et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8073808B2 · Rose · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8098179B2 · Bunyk et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8169231B2 · Berkley · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8174305B2 · Harris · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8175995B2 · Amin · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8190548B2 · Choi · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8195596B2 · Rose et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8244662B2 · Coury et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8421053B2 · Bunyk et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8536566B2 · Johansson et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8700689B2 · Macready et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8854074B2 · Berkley · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9129224B2 · Lanting et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9170278B2 · Neufeld · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9178154B2 · Bunyk · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9183508B2 · King · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9218567B2 · Macready et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9424526B2 · Ranjbar · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9501474B2 · Gopalakrishnan · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9501747B2 · Roy · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9710758B2 · Bunyk et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9727823B2 · Amin et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9875215B2 · Macready et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 9881256B2 · Hamze et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10002107B2 · Lanting · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10552755B2 · Lanting et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10789540B2 · King et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11023821B2 · Harris et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20020190249A1 · Williams et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20050167658A1 · Williams et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050250651A1 · Amin et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20050262179A1 · Tucci · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20080052055A1 · Rose et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080086438A1 · Amin et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080176750A1 · Rose et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080218519A1 · Coury et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080238531A1 · Harris · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080258753A1 · Harris · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090241013A1 · Roetteler · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20110018612A1 · Harris · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110022820A1 · Bunyk et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110057169A1 · Harris et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110060711A1 · Macready et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110231462A1 · Macready et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110238607A1 · Coury et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120094838A1 · Bunyk et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130005580A1 · Bunyk et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140187427A1 · Macready et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140250288A1 · Roy · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140324933A1 · Macready et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150032993A1 · Amin et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20180246848A1 · Douglass et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190019101A1 · Neven · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20220391744A1 · Boothby et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
JP 2010233066A · 2010 [cited by applicant]
WO 2005093649A1 · 2005 [cited by applicant]
WO 2006066415A1 · 2006 [cited by applicant]
WO 2007085074A1 · 2007 [cited by applicant]
WO 2009039634A1 · 2009 [cited by applicant]
WO 2009143166A2 · 2009 [cited by applicant]
WO 2012064974A2 · 2012 [cited by applicant]
WO 2013006836A1 · 2013 [cited by applicant]
WO 2017075246A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
Lim et al. “Coupling of Josephson current qubits using a connecting loop”, arXiv:cond-mat/0305127v3 [cond-mat.mes-hall] Sep. 24, 2004, pp. 6. [cited by examiner]
Berkley, A.J. et al., “Tunneling Spectroscopy Using a Probe Qubit,” arXiv:1210.6310v2 [cond-mat.supr-con], Jan. 3, 2013, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Grajcar et al., “Four-Qubit Device with Mixed Couplings”, Physical Review Letters, Feb. 3, 2006. https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.047006. [cited by applicant]
Maassen van den Brink, “Galvanic coupling of flux qubits simple theory and tunability”, (cond-mat.supr-con), May 16, 2006. https://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0605398. [cited by applicant]
Van Der Ploeg et al., “Controllable Coupling of Superconducting Flux Qubits,” arXiv: cond-mat/0605588v3, May 23, 2007. [cited by applicant]
Almeida, J. et al., “Probing Quantum Coherence in Qubit Arrays,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. vol. 46, 2013, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Amin et al., “Systems and Methods for Achieving Orthogonal Control of Non-Orthogonal Qubit Parameters,” U.S. Appl. No. 61/857,601, filed Jul. 23, 2013, 89 pages. [cited by applicant]
Amin, “Effect of Local Minima on Adiabatic Quantum Optimization,” arXiv:0709.0528v2, Apr. 4, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Bian et al., “Discrete optimization using quantum annealing on sparse Ising models”, Frontiers in Physics, Sep. 18, 2014. [cited by applicant]
Blatter et al., “Design aspects of superconducting-phase quantum bits,” Physical Review B 63: 174511-1-174511-9, 2001. [cited by applicant]
Bocko et al., “Prospects for Quantum Coherent Computation Using Superconducting Electronics,” IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 7(2):3638-3641, Jun. 1997. [cited by applicant]
Boothby et al., “Fast Clique Minor Generation in Chimera Qubit Connectivity Graphs”, arXiv:1507.04774v1, 2015. [cited by applicant]
Boros et al., “Local search heuristics for Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO)”, Springer, Feb. 21, 2007. [cited by applicant]
Bunyk, “D-Wave processor control circuitry”, 2009. [cited by applicant]
Bunyk, “Quantum Processor With Instance Programmable Qubit Connectivity,” U.S. Appl. No. 61/983,370, filed Apr. 23, 2014, 53 pages. [cited by applicant]
Chittineni et al., “Optimal Parameter Selection for Unsupervised Neural Network Using Genetic Algorithm,” International Journal of Computer Science, Engineering and Applications (IJCSEA) 3(5):13-27, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Choi, “Minor-embedding in adiabatic quantum computation: II. Minor-universal graph design”, Springer, Oct. 13, 2010. [cited by applicant]
Choi, Vicky. “Minor-embedding in adiabatic quantum computation: I. The parameter setting problem.” arXiv:0804.4884v1. Apr. 30, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Clarke et al., “Superconducting quantum bits,” Nature 453:1031-1042, Jun. 19, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Conlon, David “An Extremal Theorem in the Hypercube,” The Electronic Journal of Combinations 17:1 (2010), 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Devoret et al., “Superconducting Circuits for Quantum Information: An Outlook,” Science 339:1169-1174, Mar. 8, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Devoret et al., “Superconducting Qubits: A Short Review,” arXiv:cond-mat/0411174v1, Nov. 7, 2004, 41 pages. [cited by applicant]
Douglass et al., “Systems, Devices, Articles, and Methods for Quantum Processor Architecture,” U.S. Appl. No. 62/114,406, filed Feb. 10, 2015, 105 pages. [cited by applicant]
Farhi et al., “Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithms versus Simulated Annealing,” MIT-CTP #3228, arXiv:quant-ph/0201031 v1, pp. 1-16, Jan. 8, 2002. [cited by applicant]
Feynman, “Simulating Physics with Computers,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics 21(6/7): 467-488, 1982. [cited by applicant]
Friedman et al., “Quantum superposition of distinct macroscopic states,” Nature 406:43-46, Jul. 6, 2000. [cited by applicant]
Fruchterman, et al., “Graph Drawing by Force-directed Placement”, Software- Practice and Experience, vol. 21(1 1), 1129-1164 (Nov. 1991). [cited by applicant]
Gaitan, Frank, and Lane Clark. “Graph isomorphism and adiabatic quantum computing.” Physical Review A 89.2 (2014): 022342. ( Year: 2014). [cited by applicant]
Hamze et al., “Systems and Methods for Problem Solving Via Solvers Employing Problem Modification,” U.S. Appl. No. 62/040,643, filed Aug. 22, 2014, 80 pages. [cited by applicant]
Harris et al., “A Compound Josephson Junction Coupler for Flux Qubits With Minimal Crosstalk,” arXiv:0904.3784v3 [cond-mat.supr-con], Jul. 16, 2009, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Harris et al., “Phase transitions in a programmable quantum spin glass simulator”, Science, Jul. 13, 2018. [cited by applicant]
Harris et al., “Experimental Demonstration of a Robust and Scalable Flux Qubit,” arXiv:0909.4321v1, Sep. 24, 2009, 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Harris et al., “Experimental Investigation of an Eight-Qubit Unit Cell in a Superconducting Optimization Processor,” arXiv:1004.1628v2, Jun. 28, 2010, 16 pages. [cited by applicant]
Heckmann et al., “Optimal Embedding of Complete Binary Trees into Lines and Grids”, Lecture Notes in in Computer Science 2269, 1991. [cited by applicant]
Il'ichev et al., “Continuous Monitoring of Rabi Oscillations in a Josephson Flux Qubit,” arXiv:cond-mat/0303433v1, Mar. 20, 2003. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion, mailed Nov. 7, 2014, for corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2014/047874, 13 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report, mailed Dec. 2, 2016, for PCT/US2016/015100, 3 pages. [cited by applicant]
Kamada, et al., “An Algorithm for Drawings General Undirected Graphs”, Information Processing Letters 31 (1989)—7-15, North-Holland—Apr. 12, 1989. 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
King et al., “Systems and Methods for Embedding Problems Into an Analog Processor,” U.S. Appl. No. 62/324,206, filed Apr. 18, 2016, 51 pages. [cited by applicant]
King, “Systems and Devices for Quantum Processor Architectures,” U.S. Appl. No. 61/863,360, filed Aug. 7, 2013, 37 pages. [cited by applicant]
King, Andrew D., and Catherine C. McGeoch. “Algorithm engineering for a quantum annealing platform.” arXiv preprint arXiv: 1410.2628(2014). (Year: 2014). [cited by applicant]
Klymko et al., “Adiabatic Quantum Programming: Minor Embedding With Hard Faults”, arXiv, Nov. 7, 2012. [cited by applicant]
Koren, “Drawing Graphs by Eigenvectors: Theory and Practice”, Science Direct. Elsevier, Computers and Mathematics with Application 49 (2005) 1867-1888. [cited by applicant]
Lanting et al., “Systems and Methods for Increasing the Energy Scale of a Quantum Processor,” U.S. Appl. No. 61/858,023, filed Jul. 24, 2013, 49 pages. [cited by applicant]
Lanting et al., “Systems and Methods for Improving the Performance of a Quantum Processor By Shimming to Reduce Intrinsic/Control Errors,” U.S. Appl. No. 62/040,890, filed Aug. 22, 2014, 122 pages. [cited by applicant]
Layeb et al., “A New Quantum Evolutionary Local Search Algorithm for MAX 3-SAT Problem”, Springer, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Lechner et al., “A quantum annealing architecture with all-to-all connectivity from local interactions”, Science Advances. Oct. 23, 2015. https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/9/e1500838. [cited by applicant]
Levitov, et al., “Quantum Spin Chains and Majorana States in Arrays of Coupled Qubits,” arXiv:cond-mat/0108266v2 [cond-mat.mes-hall]. Aug. 19, 2001, 7 pages. [cited by applicant]
Lyakhov et al., “Quantum State Transfer in Arrays of Flux Qubits,” arXiv:cond-mat/0509478v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall], Sep. 19, 2005, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Makhlin et al., “Quantum-state engineering with Josephson-junction devices,” arXIv:cond-mat/0011269v1, arXiv:cond-mat/0011269v1, Nov. 15, 2000. [cited by applicant]
Martinis, “Superconducting phase qubits,” Quantum Inf Process 8:81-103, 2009. [cited by applicant]
Merrill et al., “Scalable GPU Graph Traversal”, Nvidia, Feb. 1, 2012. [cited by applicant]
Mooij et al., “Josephson Persistent—Current Qubit,” Science 285:1036-1039, Aug. 13, 1999. [cited by applicant]
Mutzel, “Optimization in graph drawing”, Technische Universitat Wien, 2002. [cited by applicant]
Nielsen et al., “7.8 Other implementation schemes,” in Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, 1st ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 343-345. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 17/234,469, mailed May 1, 2023, 19 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action Issued in U.S. Appl. No. 16/988,232, mailed Jun. 14, 2023, 29 pages. [cited by applicant]
Orlando et al., “Superconducting persistent-current qubit,” Physical Review B 60(22):15398-15413, Dec. 1, 1999. [cited by applicant]
Paauw, F.G., et al., “Tuning the Gap of a Superconducting Flux Qubit,” arXiv:0812.1912v1 [cond-mat.supr-con] Dec. 10, 2008, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Pearson, “On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space”, Taylor and Francis Online, Jun. 8, 2010. [cited by applicant]
Perdomo-Ortiz et al., “A Performance Estimator for Quantum Annealers: Gauge Selection and Parameter Setting.,” arXiv:1503.01083v1 [quant-ph], Mar. 3, 2015, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Rocchetto et al., “Stabilizers as a design tool for new forms of the Lechner-Hauke-Zoller annealer”, Science Advances, Oct. 21, 2016. [cited by applicant]
Roy et al., “CRISP: Congestion reduction by iterated spreading during placement”, IEEE, Dec. 28, 2009. [cited by applicant]
Shields et al., “Area efficient layouts of binary trees in grids”, ACM Digital Library, 2001. [cited by applicant]
Shor, “Introduction to Quantum Algorithms,” AT&T Labs—Research, arXiv:quant-ph/0005003 v2, pp. 1-17, Jul. 6, 2001. [cited by applicant]
Tabia, “Quantum Computing with Cluster States,” 2011, retrieved from http://www.perimertinstitute.ca/personal/gtabia/notes/clusterStateQC.pdf, 18 pages. [cited by applicant]
Trummer, Immanuel, and Christoph Koch, “Multiple query optimization on there D-Wave 2X adiabatic quantum computer.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.06437 (2015). (Year:2015) 12 pages. [cited by applicant]
Venturelli et al., “Quantum Optimization of Fully-Connected Spin Glasses”, arXiv, Jun. 29, 2014. [cited by applicant]
Written Opinion, mailed Dec. 2, 2016, for PCT/US2016/015100, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Young et al., “Adiabatic quantum optimization with the wrong Hamiltonian”, arXiv, Oct. 2, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Zagoskin et al., “Superconducting Qubits,” arXiv:0805.0164v1, May 1, 2008. [cited by applicant]