Add another Advantage2 in Leap #403
Conversation
| - :math:`16.7 \pm 1.0\ \text{mK}` | ||
|
|
||
| * - :math:`\rm M_{\rm AFM}`: Maximum mutual inductance for qubit pairs | ||
| - :math:`2.217\ \text{pH}` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mafm needs to be divided by 4, that is my mistake from the QPU properties. should be 0.554. Also, I just looked online and the Adv2 chips should also be divided by 4 ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gabrielpl1, is this what you are saying:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I quickly reran a variation on this experiment:
https://docs.dwavequantum.com/en/latest/quantum_research/solver_configuration.html#qpu-config-emulate-with-fbo
Figure 176 and got a qualitatively similar result when using the old MAFM convention.
Using the new MAFM values the gradient associated to flux biases is halved, and the discrepancy becomes much larger. Can we confirm the Hamiltonian for a single qubit where h is the linear bias and fb is the flux_bias, Ip is the persitent current?
H = B(s)/2 h_i - Ip(s) fb_i = MAFM Ip^2 h_i - Ip fb_i ?
3 participants
HTML is here