DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it appears to read like a claim. Please revise. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 , 9, 10, 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al, Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 024001 (2023); doi: 10.1063/5.0135219 Submitted: 17 November 2022 . Accepted: 18 December 2022 . Published Online: 9 January 2023.
Re claim 1:
The reference to Zhang et al for a quantum, superconducting circuit shows qubit(Q1, Q2), and coupling (C)element coupled to the qubits, a readout element(R1) associated with the qubit 1, is also shown in figure 1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
671
625
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Q1 is selected as the ‘prober’ qubit with the readout element(r1); re tuning a frequency of the qubit;
As noted on page 2, col 1: the qubit is tuned:
.”The frequencies of qubits and the coupler can be tuned”, (i.e, Q1 tuning/prober, “ by dc-flux bias statically and by ac-flux bias dynamically; the dc- and ac-flux bias are synthesized by a commercial bias-tee and applied on the Z-control line.”
Performing a measurement of a parameter of the probing element on the readout element is highlighted ( see page 2 col 2, lines 9-11:
“The prober is driven with a resonant microwave tone, and its final state can be used as a pointer state that can be further readout by its own readout resonator with high fidelity.”
The figure above shows the coupler state(s)(parameter l 0,1> ) as a function of drive frequency/tone(parameter of probe element), for example.
See page 2, Col 1: lines 8-17
“Consider a typical tunable coupling structure as shown in Fig. 1(a), where two qubits and a coupler are directly coupled to each other by capacitances C12; C1c, and C2c. 1 Both qubits have their own XYcontrol and Z-control lines and are capacitively coupled to their readout resonators, while the coupler has only a Z-control line. The frequencies of qubits and the coupler can be tuned”, (i.e, Q1 tuning/prober “ by dc-flux bias statically and by ac-flux bias dynamically; the dc- and ac-flux bias are synthesized by a commercial bias-tee and applied on the Z-control line. To fully control and measure the state of the coupler, we utilize one of the neighboring qubits, Q1, for example, as a prober “ (SELECT) “and use the XY-control line of the other qubit to drive the coupler.” Note(Re claims 14 and 15): If Q1 is the ‘prober’ then either one of the coupler or the Q2 can be the target where the state can be determined. See page 3, col 2, 2nd ¶
The reference does not explicitly describe an effective coupling rate of the probing element and the coupling element in the strong coupling regime.
With regards this, page 4, col.2, lines 15-18, notes:
“The readout method of the coupler presented in this work can be utilized with other types of coupling schemes where a strong ZZ interaction between qubit and the coupler can be exploited, such as the QCCQ structure,”
Thus, the effective coupling rate is a function of the coupling scheme used in the special case noted and strong ZZ interaction is suggestive of a strong coupling regime, a simple matter of design consideration.
In light of the above it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have recognized that the coupling between the prober qubit and coupler, has a particular strength, and an effective coupling rate(over time) is dependent on the coupling scheme used and is a simple matter of design consideration to alleviate cross-talk, for example.
Re claims 9 and 10:
As shown in Fig. 5(a) of the Zhang et al reference, a procedure is used to calibrate the flux distortion of the coupler. Where biasing the coupler away from a sweet point(detuning), its frequency is sensitive to its Z flux, i.e., the frequency of the qubit is sensitized to the coupler frequency.
PNG
media_image2.png
540
579
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 10: per the Zhang et al reference: As the qubit is pulsed with a tone, the frequency of the qubit is measured and a frequency changing signal is applied to the coupler, the state of the coupler can be determined and as shown above(figure 5) the coupler flux can be reconstructed where the calibration curve based on ‘prober’ /qubit 1 frequency and coupler flux is generated.
Re claims 12, 13, 14 and 20:
12. The method of claim 10, further comprising establishing the calibration curve by: applying a plurality of frequency-changing signals to the coupling element; measuring qubit frequencies resulting from the plurality of frequency-changing signals; mapping the qubit frequencies as measured to the plurality of frequency-changing signals; and selecting a portion of the mapping where a sensitivity of qubit frequency to changes in coupler flux is maximized as the calibration curve.
AS noted in reference, see figure 4, page 3, col 2, 2nd ¶: a plurality of frequency changing signals/ pulse tones as a function of the coupler Z bias are used, the microwave drive frequency is swept(see figure 2 description)
Re mapping: page 3, col 2, 2nd ¶
“To measure the crosstalk coefficient(flux cross-talk parameter:” ( Re clm 13) “between coupler and qubit (Q2 second qubit/ target “ (Re cl. 14 ) “, for example), let us first mark one of them as the target and the other as the bias. Then, we use a microwave π pulse of 500 ns duration with fixed frequency ωd to drive the target while sweeping” (mapping) “ the target Z bias amplitude for each value of the bias Z bias amplitude. When this π pulse is resonant with the target frequency ωt” (selected portion) “, the excited state probability of the target is maximum.”
That is, the coupler flux sensitivity is maximized. See figure 4 for crosstalk calibration curve.
Please note that the qubits and coupler elements are superconducting elements(Re clm 20).
The method steps being inherent in the structure as described above.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8, 11, 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARNOLD M KINKEAD whose telephone number is (571)272-1763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-5:30pm(Fri-Flex).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
ARNOLD M. KINKEAD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2849
/ARNOLD M KINKEAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2849