Python orchestration, primitive compilation, deterministic simulation, TTL/photon emulation and traceable outputs.
Quantum Control Software Engineer
Trapped-ion control software from pulse intent to measurable evidence.
Deterministic timing, hardware adapters, photon acquisition, and evidence-gated calibration.
01 · TIMING
Measurement-aware pulse validation
Specify what real captures must prove across pulse width, alignment, phase window and repeatability.
Width · alignment · phase · repeatability 02 · ARCHITECTURERegistry and adapter-driven control
Keep device I/O, qubit growth and future transport or photonic links outside orchestration branches.
Maintainable · extensible · observable 03 · VERIFICATIONSoftware simulation + electrical emulation
Exercise the same contracts through deterministic simulation and TTL/photon hardware before any ion claim.
No-ion failure-path coverage 04 · FULL STACKOpenQASM → hardware → PMT evidence
Preserve circuit identity through primitive compilation, backend execution, photon acquisition and analysis.
Traceable circuit-to-photon ownershipM4i.66xx AWG/DDS adapter, multi-tone carrier control, SSB upconversion and hardware-specific APIs.
No personal Spectrum operation, eleQtron proprietary topology or physical-ion gate-fidelity claim.
01 · Measurement-aware timing validation
A timing claim is not complete until the scope agrees.
The interactive trace is a literature-informed model of the intended sequence. It defines the signals, timing relationships and acceptance questions that a real capture would need to verify.
The table redraws the supplied diagram, “Functional optical table · Not to scale”. These connections come from that sketch; the thesis references below provide comparison and technical context.
Read connections from the source sketch
- 369 nm: laser → FR / ISO → AOM → HWP · PBS → 14.7 GHz EOM → M1 → D1 → Beam combine → trap. A separate 2.1 GHz EOM also enters D1; its input is unspecified.
- 935 nm: laser → FR / ISO → AOM → 3.1 GHz EOM → D2 → Beam combine → trap.
- 638 nm: laser → AOM → M2 → trap.
- Collection: trap → Collection optics → PMT / EMCCD, shown as one detection group.
Floating accessory labels have no confirmed position in the beam path. They appear in the accessory area with amber dots. The requested RF and control equipment appears on the separate shelf; its wiring is unspecified.
Thesis references
Click a block or connection for its specific figure or page. T1–T4 identify the apparatus sources and control-system context; the sequence reference below has its own bibliography.
[T1] Christopher Paul Knapp · Sussex
Towards scalable quantum technologies. PhD thesis submitted March 2024; repository publication 15 August 2025.
Primary apparatus: the macroscopic experiment in Figs. 3.15–3.16. The thesis distinguishes its optical delivery from the microwave/RF synthesis chains and describes a separate RF re-routing for electric-field sensing. A 638/760 nm clear-out source is discussed, but no installed branch is shown in this optical figure.
Fig. 3.16 · optics · p. 88Fig. 3.15 · MW/RF · p. 85§3.4.1 · laser sources · p. 96
[T2] A. J. Rasmusson · Indiana
Trapped Ion Cooling, Heating, and Thermometry. PhD thesis, Indiana University, May 2024.
Comparison apparatus: separate Doppler, detection, protection and optical-pumping branches, plus fibre-coupled 935 nm modulation. Its quantum gates use 355 nm Raman light; that separate gate path is outside this optical-delivery view.
Fig. 3.5 · 369 nm layout · p. 61Fig. 3.4 · auxiliary lasers · p. 58§3.3.3 · 935 nm EOM · p. 60§3.3.4 · EOM/AOM branches · pp. 62–63
[T3] Andrew Russ Risinger · Maryland
Engineering a Control System for a Logical Qubit-Scale Trapped Ion Quantum Computer. PhD thesis, 2023 repository edition; the defence and some front matter are dated 2022.
Further reading for the control interface, host PC, ARTIQ FPGA and RFSoC waveform generation. Fig. 4.3 is an example network. These connections are not presented as wiring for the Sussex or Indiana apparatus.
[T4] Sebastian Weidt · Sussex
Towards microwave based ion trap quantum technology. PhD thesis submitted August 2013; repository deposit 2014.
Historical comparison: the Chapter 3 apparatus. The 739 nm modulation precedes frequency doubling; 935 nm uses diode-current modulation. Grouped terminal optics preserve the limits of the published drawing.
Fig. 3.1 · optical setup · p. 25§3.1.1 · modulation · pp. 27–28Fig. 3.3 · detection · p. 31
Independent sequence reference
The timing model below combines the cited MAGIC research and system examples. Its values are independent of the apparatus selected above; changing a thesis does not assign those timings or channel names to that laboratory.
SEQUENCE CONTRACT · ALIGNED TO SCOPE
Readable √time compression + 78 px floor · cursor and readout follow physical sequence time
Published parameter
MW Qubit 1 · Gate operation
Ref [2] · PRX 15, 021079 (2025)
- A / ΩAmplitude
- Ω1 / 2π = 94.8 kHz
- f / ωFrequency
- fμw ≈ 12.6 GHz
- τDuration
- 313 µs
- φPhase
- φ(t) = 0.749 sin(2π · 94.8 kHz · t)
Notation: A amplitude · Ω/2π Rabi rate · f frequency · ω/2π angular-frequency form · τ duration · φ phase · Δ detuning
Each channel has a fixed color. Stage widths use readable √time compression with a 78 px floor; duration labels and the moving time readout retain physical sequence time.MAGIC microwave/RF SBC · not Raman
The MW/RF red sideband removes motion; light resets the spin.
The modeled coherent step is a direct hyperfine red-sideband drive near 12.6 GHz. Each step is followed by 369 nm optical pumping; 935 nm repumping closes leakage through D3/2. This is not a two-beam stimulated-Raman sequence.
target nt ↓MW/RF RSB π width ∝ 1/√nt[SYS] fixed 5 µs optical reset
CALCULATED tπ LIST · TARGET n = 10 → 1
Derived in the Lamb–Dicke approximation from Ref [1]: ηeff=0.0359 and carrier Ω0/2π=39.47(4) kHz. Pulse height remains an ON/OFF envelope; only duration is proportional.
REF [1] · MAGIC MW/RFDirect f01−νz hyperfine drive in a static magnetic-field gradient, with continuous 369 nm optical reset. The paper calls the 12.6 GHz field RF; it lies in the microwave band by conventional naming.
DISPLAYED · CONTROLLER MODELTen discrete MW/RF first-RSB π pulses followed by fixed 5 µs [SYS] optical-reset windows. Relative π widths follow the cited coupling; this is not the exact Ref [1] shot.
RAMAN SBC · NOT DISPLAYEDTwo off-resonant optical fields drive a stimulated-Raman sideband when their difference frequency satisfies Δfopt=f01−νz. AOM/EOM electronics set the optical beat note; the ion is not directly driven by a resonant 12.6 GHz microwave field.
Evidence boundary: this is a composite literature-grounded MAGIC MW/RF model, not one experimental shot and not proof of eleQtron's installed cooling sequence or proprietary calibration. Ref [1] reports 80 ms continuous MW/RF red-sideband cooling at 117.48(11) kHz axial frequency; the proportional discrete π-pulse train is a controller-side explanatory model derived from the same reported ηeff and carrier Rabi rate. Ref [2] reports the MAGIC gate in a different setup at 98.08 kHz. Ref [4] is included only to distinguish optical Raman coupling. [SYS] rows mirror implemented logical channel names and roles in the portable control map. Optical modulation index, MW/RF power, phase and physical calibration remain N/R unless independently cited.
References: [1] Sriarunothai et al., J. Mod. Opt. 65, 560–567 (2018) · [2] Nünnerich et al., Phys. Rev. X 15, 021079 (2025) · [3] eleQtron · MAGIC uses radio-frequency control · [4] Feng et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 053001 (2020) · optical Raman sideband example · [SYS] ARTIQ/QUA logical channel map
Public-evidence system study
The scope is an engineering sidecar—not the shot-loop data plane.
University of Siegen apparatus descriptions place deterministic sequencing, detector acquisition and state discrimination inside the experiment loop. Oscilloscopes observe selected electrical nodes through probes or splitters for commissioning, validation and debugging.
01 · SchedulePython or host software compiles the experiment; a real-time sequencer owns TTL triggers and deterministic I/O.
02 · DriveAOM/EOM channels prepare and detect; AWG/DDS plus microwave conversion deliver coherent control.
03 · Fluoresce369 nm emission passes collection optics, spatial filtering and a narrow-band optical filter.
04 · AcquireEMCCD, PMT or SPAD data enters a frame grabber, counter, TDC, ADC or FPGA for classification and feedback.
- Laser lockPhotodiode, cavity transmission and error signal.
- RF / microwaveIF envelope, trigger, mixer or crystal-detector output.
- Clock / triggerTTL fan-out, camera-ready and AWG trigger alignment, skew and jitter.
- Detector front endPulse amplitude, noise, threshold, saturation and signal integrity.
Software boundary
Python/SCPI can configure the scope, acquire waveforms and emit commissioning, calibration or monitoring artifacts. The real-time controller still owns shot scheduling, while detector interfaces and analysis software own structured photon counts, frames, timestamps and bright/dark decisions.
Not claimed: eleQtron's current oscilloscope vendor, bandwidth, sample rate, channel count or installed topology are not public.System-study references: [4] Piltz, 2016 · EMCCD/PMT triggering and ADwin sequencing · [5] Huber, 2024 · AWG hand-off and image feedback · [6] eleQtron · Python control software and programmatic device control · [7] DLR QSea II · SPAD and control-electronics integration direction
Requested window, sample depth and scope readback must agree. A plausible trace from a shortened pre-trigger record is rejected.
All channels must share one record length, and the expected dark window must prove that the capture contains the intended shot phase.
Repeated captures must agree numerically. A conflicting capture stays a disagreement; it is never averaged into a green result.
02 · Extensibility and maintainability
Scale qubits by adding contracts—not branches.
The orchestration core should not care whether control stays in one zone, crosses a shuttling boundary or reaches another module through a photonic link. Hardware-specific behavior belongs behind registries and adapters.
Core mechanisms implemented Shuttling & photonic links: architecture targetsOne source of truth
Process, dataset and backend registries define what exists. A new lane cannot silently omit its timing probe, readback contract or safety gate.
Hardware owns its I/O
The implemented control contract keeps orchestration separate from device I/O. Spectrum M4i.66xx/DDS is modelled as an eleQtron-facing adapter target; shuttling and photonic links enter through the same seam—not an if qubits > N rewrite.
Agents can change it safely
Code maps identify ownership; contract tests detect registry drift; fail-closed admission blocks incomplete capability or stale runtime evidence before execution.
CURRENT CONTROL MODELSingle control regionRegistry-driven qubit, pair, PMT and calibration contracts.
EXTENSION TARGETMulti-zone shuttlingTransport plan becomes a scheduled adapter with explicit timing and hand-off evidence.
EXTENSION TARGETPhotonic module linkRemote entanglement becomes another typed execution/readout lane with heralding provenance.
Agent maintenance loop
- 1 · Read contractLocate registry, dataset owner and evidence boundary.
- 2 · Add adapterKeep device-specific I/O outside orchestration.
- 3 · Run guardsCatch drift, stale mappings and unsupported paths.
- 4 · Emit evidenceRetain provenance, limitation and terminal outcome.
03 · Timing verification system
Test the same contract through two independent realities.
A fast deterministic simulator checks logic and data contracts. An electrically live lane runs the production hardware-timed control core with real TTL/DDS envelopes and a controlled photon source—still without ions.
Verification lanes implementedDeterministic software simulation
Compile the exact primitive OpenQASM, execute synthetic counts and verify repeatable evidence without lab network access.
- Same primitive circuit and execution contract
- Deterministic replay and evidence hash
- Freshness, all-dark and capability failures are injectable
- Proves software behavior—not RTIO or wiring
Electrically live control path
The production control core runs on the test master; a scope observes physical 369/935 envelopes while controlled TTL photon pulses exercise the counter/readout chain.
- Real FPGA-backed scheduling and deterministic timeline
- Scope-visible DDS/TTL timing envelopes
- Controlled photon counts through the acquisition boundary
- Proves electrical/dataflow integration—not ion physics
Fail-closed evidence ladder: software-sim results cannot enter calibration; electrically live results cannot claim state preparation or gate fidelity; physical-ion verified capability remains explicitly separate.
04 · Circuit-to-photon full stack
Own every boundary from algorithm to evidence.
The system does not stop at compilation or pulse generation. It carries circuit identity through execution, photon acquisition, analysis and a claim that includes its own limitation.
OpenQASM → control contract → counts implemented Spectrum M4i.66xx AWG/DDS: integration targetThe diagram distinguishes implemented software contracts from the publicly documented eleQtron microwave backend, which is presented as an integration target rather than personal hands-on evidence. Horizontal scrolling is available on narrow screens.
PUBLIC ELEQTRON QUBIT-CONTROL PATH · REF [4]
Python contract to microwave carrier.
Python / control services
↓
Spectrum M4i.66xx AWG + M4i.66xx-DDS
↓
SSB mixer + microwave LO
↓
fμw ≈ 12.64 GHz → 171Yb+ MAGIC processor
Spectrum’s official eleQtron case study identifies the M4i.66xx series as the microwave qubit-control AWG family. The control-software and FPGA boundaries are consistent with eleQtron’s public engineering roles: Python APIs/data interfaces above hardware-specific I/O, and FPGA signal generation plus real-time feedback below.
fkcarrier frequency
φkcarrier phase
Akcarrier amplitude
dfk/dtfrequency slope
dAk/dtamplitude slope
16 bit · up to 1.25 GS/sPCIe AWG family; one, two or four synchronous channels.
k = 1…20 carriers/outputEach carrier exposes fk, φk, Ak, dfk/dt and dAk/dt.
Δtcmd ≈ 6.4 nsfμw ≈ 12.64 GHz after SSB mixing; Δfion ≈ 3–5 MHz.
References: [4] Spectrum Instrumentation · DDS technology enables microwave ion control for quantum computing · [5] eleQtron · Senior Software Engineer—Python control software · [6] eleQtron · FPGA Engineer—Quantum Computing
Claim boundary: the public source confirms the M4i.66xx series, not an exact installed submodel. M4i.6631 appears in the article image caption only. No claim is made about eleQtron’s laser, camera, trap-DAC or laboratory-wide sequencer stack.
Selected research · application bridge
Translate application questions into executable quantum workflows.
Collaborations across quantum machine learning, generative chemistry and quantum chemistry gave me a working vocabulary on both sides of the interface: domain objectives and benchmarks on one side; circuits, simulators, hardware constraints and defensible evidence on the other. Google Scholar profile ↗
01 · ASKApplication objective & success metric
02 · MODELPhysics assumptions & algorithm choice
03 · EXECUTECircuit, backend & resource constraints
04 · EXPLAINEvidence, benchmark & limitations
Unentangled quantum reinforcement learning agents in the OpenAI Gym
Application → experimentTurned standard reinforcement-learning tasks and metrics into a single-qubit variational workflow, classical post-processing and execution on real IBM quantum machines.
Read the arXiv preprintExploring the Advantages of Quantum Generative Adversarial Networks in Generative Chemistry
Domain objective → hybrid modelConnected small-molecule generation goals to hybrid quantum-classical GAN components, then compared physicochemical, goal-directed and validity trade-offs.
Read the ACS paperQuantum simulation of preferred tautomeric state prediction
Scientific workflow → resource constraintsMapped a drug-discovery question through active-space selection, qubit-efficient encoding and VQE while retaining benchmark and hardware-resource limits.
Publisher-stated contribution: performed noiseless and noisy quantum simulations with Yu Shee.
Read the npj paperThese publications evidence cross-domain collaboration in quantum applications. They complement—but do not replace—the separately labelled software and electrical evidence for the trapped-ion control system above.