Fast and robust quantum control for multimode interactions by using shortcuts to

adiabaticity
Hao Zhang, Xue-Ke Song, Qing Ai, Haibo Wang, Guo-Jian Yang, and Fu-Guo Deng∗
Department of Physics, Applied Optics Beijing Area Major Laboratory,
Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
(Dated: September 5, 2018)
Adiabatic quantum control is a very important approach for quantum physics and quantum in-
formation processing. It holds the advantage with robustness to experimental imperfections but
accumulates more decoherence due to the long evolution time. Here, we propose a universal proto-
col for fast and robust quantum control in multimode interactions of a quantum system by using
shortcuts to adiabaticity. The results show this protocol can speed up the evolution of a multimode
arXiv:1809.00102v1 [quant-ph] 1 Sep 2018

quantum system effectively, and it can also keep the robustness very good while adiabatic quan-
tum control processes cannot. We apply this protocol for the quantum state transfer in quantum
information processing in the photon-phonon interactions in an optomechanical system, showing
a perfect result. These good features make this protocol have the capability of improving effec-
tively the feasibility of the practical applications of multimode interactions in quantum information
processing in experiment.

I. INTRODUCTION For example, in optomechanical systems [33–36], photon-

phonon-photon [37–41] and phonon-photon-phonon [42–
As a very important approach, adiabatic quantum con- 45] interactions are two typical multimode interactions.
trol has been used widely in quantum physics. Typical Effectively controlling multimode interactions is a very
applications are the rapid adiabatic passage technique important task for many practical applications of a quan-
[1] and the stimulated Raman adiabatic passage tech- tum system in quantum information processing, such as
nique [2] for two-level and three-level quantum systems, quantum state transfer [38, 39] and entanglement gener-
respectively. According to the adiabatic theorem [3], if ation [40, 41]. The adiabatic quantum control protocols
the state of a quantum system remains non-degenerate for multimode interactions have been proposed in op-
and starts in one of the instantaneous eigenstates, it will tomechanical systems [38, 39]. Those protocols also have
evolve along this initial state in an adiabatic process. a big challenge in conflicting between speed and robust-
However, the change of coupling, described by a small pa- ness.
rameter ε, results in an undesired transition between the
different eigenstates with the order of exp(−1/ε) [4, 5]. To solve the challenge in conflicting between speed and
Therefore, to suppress the undesired transition, the adia- robustness, here, we propose the first protocol to realize
batic approach should be changed slowly enough but ac- a fast and robust quantum control for multimode interac-
cumulates more total decoherence in practice. Both the tions of a quantum system. It has the following remark-
intrinsic undesired transition and the environmental de- able advantages. First, it is faster and can improve the
coherence usually lead to the evolution error and decrease speed of the whole multimode interaction process, which
the fidelity. Usually a fast process with a high fidelity is decreases the total decoherence of the quantum system
needed in quantum information processing, such as quan- in quantum information processing. Second, compared
tum computing. To overcome this conflicting, several to the adiabatic process, it is transitionless and has a
protocols, called shortcuts to adiabaticity (STA) [6–16], higher fidelity. Third, it is robust to the experimental
have been proposed, such as the transitionless quantum imperfection of time interval. These good features make
driving (TQD) [8–13]. STA has been used for some prac- it improve effectively the feasibility of practical applica-
tical applications in quantum information processing [17– tions of multimode interactions in quantum information
27], such as quantum state transfer [17, 18], entanglement processing and quantum state engineering.
generation [19, 20] and quantum gates [21–24]. In recent
years, STA has drawn a wide attention and been demon- This article is organized as follows: We first introduce
strated well in experiment in different systems, such as multimode interactions and its adiabatic quantum con-
Bose-Einstein condensates in optical lattices [28], cold trol in Sec. II. In Sec. III, we calculate the fast and robust
atoms [29], trapped ions [30] and nitrogen-vacancy cen- quantum control protocol for multimode interactions by
ters in diamond [31, 32]. using STA and compare it with adiabatic approach. For
Multimode interactions are common in quantum physical implementation, we perform the fast protocol for
physics and have been studied in some physical systems. photon-phonon interaction in optomechanical system in
Sec. IV and analyze its robustness and fidelity in Sec. V.
A conclusion is given in Sec. IV. In Appendix VI, we give
the transitionless quantum driving algorithm for multi-
∗ Corresponding author: [email protected] mode interactions.
 2

III. FAST AND ROBUST QUANTUM

CONTROL FOR MULTIMODE INTERACTIONS

To improve the speed and mitigate the infidelity, we

g1 a3 g2 use the STA to speed up the adiabatic process in three-
mode interactions of a quantum system. The main obsta-
a1 a2 cle for accelerating the adiabatic process is the transition
G
amplitude between eigenmodes which will increase when
the speed is accelerated. If the speed is up, the evolu-
FIG. 1: Schematic diagram for universal multimode interac- tion path will deviate the original way and more inherent
tions in a quantum system. Each mode can be represented errors are produced. Therefore, the robustness becomes
by a harmonic oscillator. a3 is a intermediate mode for con- lower. To overcome this mutual restriction, removing
necting two others. the transition is the first task. According to the TQD
algorithm [10], we can find a new way with no undesired
transitions and calculate the matrix M1 (t) by using the
formula (see appendix for more details) given by
II. MULTIMODE INTERACTIONS AND
ADIABATIC QUANTUM CONTROL X ∂ψn (t)
M1 (t) = i | ihψn (t)|, (4)
n
∂t
We show the three-mode quantum system in Fig. 1.
Two harmonic oscillators couple to each other via the in- where |n(t)i is the eigenmode. Substituting the all eigen-
termediate one. The effective Hamiltonian of this system modes into Eq. (4), one can get a new matrix M ′ (t) given
is given by by
 
3 0 0 iG
Ĥ1 = g1 â†1 â3 + g2 â†2 â3 + H.c., (1) X
M1 (t) = i ψ̇n ψn† =  0 0 0  , (5)
n=1 −iG 0 0
where âi (â†i ) (i = 1, 2, 3) are the annihilation (creation)
operators for the corresponding i-th mode with the fre- where G = (ġ1 g2 − g1 ġ2 )/g20 . The result of the matrix
quency ωi , respectively. gi (t) is the effective coupling M1 (t) indicates that there exists a direct transition be-
strength between the corresponding mode with the in- tween the modes 1 and 2. We choose the adiabatic cou-
termediate one. The Heisenberg equations of the system pling strengths with ‘Vitanov’ shape [46] given by
can be derived as
g1 (t) = g0 sin(θ(t)),
id~v (t)/dt = M (t)~v (t), (2) g2 (t) = g0 cos(θ(t)),
θ(t) = π2 1+e−ν(t−5/ν)
1
. (6)
where the vector operator ~v (t) = [â1 (t), â3 (t), â2 (t)]T ,
and the matrix M (t) can be expressed as Here, ν describes the duration of coupling strengths.
  Therefore, with above functions, the transitionless
0 g1 (t) 0 matrix M1 is given by making G = θ̇(t) in Eq.(5). The
M (t) =  g1 (t) 0 g2 (t)  . (3) comparison between the adiabatic quantum control and
0 g2 (t) 0 the accelerated TQD protocol in quantum state transfer
process is shown in Fig. 2. We change the duration
The matrix M (t) has the eigenvalues λ = 0, ±g0 and the of coupling strengths and the adiabatic processes are
corresponding eigenmodes are ψ1 =√[−g2 /g0 , 0, g1 /g0 ]T accelerated. But the results become imperfect. However,
and ψ2,3 = [g1 /g0 , ±1, g2 /g0 ]T / 2, where g0 =
p by using the TQD, the new quantum control processes
g21 + g22 . The eigenmode ψ1 with the eigenvalues λ = 0 always keep the perfect result in the population transfer.
is a dark mode which decouples with the intermediate Comparing (g), (h) and (i) in Fig. 2, the final time for
mode. completing the quantum state transfer becomes shorter.
The adiabatic quantum control is a very effective ap- The total time in Fig. 2 (i) is three times shorter than
proach for quantum information processing between the Fig. 2 (g).
modes 1 and 2, such as the quantum state transfer be-
tween these two modes. It is robust against the dissipa-
tion from the intermediate mode by evolving along the
dark state adiabatically. However, to suppress the unde- IV. PRACTICAL APPLICATION FOR
sired transition between different eigenmodes, the near PHOTON-PHONON INTERACTIONS
perfect adiabatic process needs so long time that accu-
mulates more decoherence in the whole process. This A typical physical system for photon-phonon interac-
infidelity is a big challenge for an adiabatic quantum con- tions is an optomechanical one. For three-mode inter-
trol. actions in this quantum system, there are two kinds of
 3

(a) (b) (c)

1 1 1

Coupling(1/t)
Coupling(1/t)

Coupling(1/t)
g1
0.5 0.5 0.5 g2
G
0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
t t t
(d) (e) (f)
1 1 1
Population

Population

Population
p
1
0.5 0.5 0.5 p2
p3
0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
t t t
(g) (h) (i)
1 1 1
Population

Population

Population
p
1
0.5 0.5 0.5 p2
p3
0 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
t t t
(a) (b)
FIG. 2: Simulation of two quantum control approaches for the quantum state transfer in multimode interactions. The initial
state is prepared in mode a1 with the Fock state |1i. All the labels for curves with different colors are given in the last figures
of every row. p1 , p2 and p3 are the populations for the modes a1 , a2 and a3 , respectively. (a)-(c) are the variation of coupling
strengths. (d)-(f) are the corresponding adiabatic quantum control processes. (g)-(i) are the corresponding fast and robust
quantum control processes. The parameter changes as follow: (a) ν = 0.5 MHz; (b) ν = 1 MHz; (c) ν = 2 MHz.

(a) (b) where âi (â†i ) (i = 1, 2) and b̂(b̂† ) are the annihilation (cre-
w1 w2 ation) operators for the i-th cavity mode with frequency
wm1 wop wm 2
ωi and the mechanical mode, respectively. ωm is the me-
√
wm chanical frequency. ∆i = ωdi − ωi and Gi = G0i ni
are the laser detuning and the effective linear coupling
strength, respectively. G0i and ni are the single-photon
FIG. 3: (a) Practical schematic diagram for photon-phonon- optomechanical coupling rate and the intracavity photon
photon interactions induced by the optomechanical system number induced by the driving field with the frequency
composed of two cavities and a membrane. The two cavity ωdi , respectively. We consider the case that both cavity
walls and the middle membrane are fixed, but the membrane
modes are driven near the red sidebands. In the inter-
can vibrate. (b) Schematic diagram for phonon-phonon-
phonon interactions. Two cavity walls are fixed on cantilevers.
action picture, the Hamiltonian of the system becomes
(under the rotating-wave approximation)
X
Ĥ3 = δi â†i âi + Gi (â†i b̂m + b̂†m âi ), (8)
i=1,2
interactions, i.e., the photon-phonon-photon interaction
shown in Fig. 3(a) and the phonon-photon-phonon inter- where δi = −∆i − ωm . The Heisenberg equation of the
action shown in Fig. 3(b). Here, we consider Fig. 3(a) in system can be derived with
which an optomechanical system composed of two cavity
modes coupled to each other via the mechanical mode. id~vop (t)/dt = Mop (t)~vop (t), (9)
Two optical cavities connect to each other via a middle
membrane. After the standard linearization procedure, where the vector operator ~vop (t) = [â1 (t), b̂m (t), â2 (t)]T ,
the Hamiltonian of the system is given by (h̄ = 1) [38, 39] and the matrix Mop (t) is the same as Eq.(3) with the
condition δi = 0. There exists an optomechanical dark
Xh i mode [37] and it is used to make the adiabatic control
Ĥ2 = ωm b̂† b̂ + −∆i â†i âi + Gi (â†i + âi )(b̂ + b̂† ) , (7) with quantum information processing between two opti-
i=1,2 cal modes.
 4

(a) 6 (b) 1 (c) 0.05

Gi p1 0.04

Coupling G i (MHz)
0.8 0.04
p2 0.02

Population
4

Phonon
0.6 p3
phonon 5 6 7 8 9 10
0.04 0.03
/G im
0.4
2
0.02
0.2 0.02
0
0 5
0 0 0.01
0 10 20 0 5 10 15 20 20 40 60 80
t( s) t( s) (MHz)

FIG. 4: Simulation of the quantum state transfer by using our fast and robust quantum control in optomechanical interactions.
(a) The shape of new coupling strengths with the parameters ν = 2 MHz and δ = 40 MHz. (b) The process of the population
transfer by using the coupling in (a). P1 , P2 and P3 are the populations for the optical modes 1, 2 and the mechanical mode,
respectively. The population of the phonon is amplified in the insert. (c) Variation of the maximal average phonon number with
detuning. The insert is the variation of the maximal average phonon number vs the rate between detuning and the maximal
coupling strength.

To realize a fast and robust quantum control for above The photon in cavity 1 is transferred to cavity 2 by us-
process, we usually need seek a direct coupling between ing our protocol with a higher fidelity, shown in Fig. 4(b).
two optical modes based on Eq.(5). Here, it is hard to The phonon number is suppressed in the whole process
construct a direct coupling and we replace it with an ef- and the maximum value is about 0.02 due to the large
fective two-mode interaction. We set the large detuning detuning interaction. From Fig. 4(c), one can see that
condition with δi ≫ Gi in Eq.(8) and the large energy the maximal average phonon number is inversely propor-
offsets suppress the transitions between the optical mode tional to the rate between the detuning and the maximal
and the mechanical mode [47, 48]. Hence, one can adi- coupling strength.
abatically eliminate the mechanical mode b̂ and obtain
the effective beam-splitter-like Hamiltonian 1
X
Ĥ4 = (δi + Ωi )â†i âi + Ω(â†1 â2 + â†2 â1 ), (10) 0.995
i=1,2
0.99
Fidelity

where Ωi = G2i /δi and Ω = G1 G2 (δ1−1 + δ2−1 )/2. We set 0.985

δ1 +Ω1 = δ2 +Ω2 and δ = δ1 = δ2 . InP the new interaction
picture under the Hamiltonian Ĥ0 = i=1,2 (δi +Ωi )â†i âi , 0.98
G1
one can derive the matrix M2 (t) in the Heisenberg picture G2
0.975
with
0.97
0 0 G1δG2
 
-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
M2 (t) =  0 0 0  . (11) t( s)
G1 G2
δ 0 0
FIG. 5: Fidelities for the parameter time deviation ∆t. The
The effective matrix M2 (t) is equivalent to M1 (t) shown range of the time interval is [−0.60, 0.60]. The positive and
in Eq. (4) derived by the TQD algorithm, when negative values represent the time delay and advance, respec-
tively. G1 (G2 ) is the result from changing G1 (G2 ) and keep-
G1 G2 g1 ġ2 − ġ1 g2 ing G2 (G1 ) unchanged. The parameters are chosen to be
= . (12) ν = 2 MHz and δ = 40 MHz.
δ g20

The evolutions of the photon and the phonon in the

system are plotted in Fig. 4 by using the Hamiltonian
in Eq.(8). With the adiabatic coupling Eq.(6), Eq.(12)
becomes G1 G2 = δ θ̇(t). Here, we design the coupling V. ANALYSIS OF ROBUSTNESS AND
with G1 = G2 shown in Fig. 4(a). The other parameters FIDELITY
should be chosen to satisfy the large detuning condition
δ ′ ≫ Gi and δ1 + Ω1 = δ2 + Ω2 . Here we choose δ = 40 It is hard to accurately control the time interval be-
MHz and ν = 2 MHz. tween two coupling strengths in the actual experiment.
 5

Therefore we consider the influence caused by a small de-

viation of the time interval in Fig. 5. We tune the time (a) 1
interval from −0.6µs to 0.6µs, and the results indicates =15kHz
that our protocol is insensitive to the deviation of the =25kHz
=35kHz
time interval.

Fidelity
When the dissipation of the mechanical oscillator and 0.5
the decay of the cavity is taken into account, the dynam-
ics of the quantum system described by the Lindblad
form master equation is expressed by
dρ̂ 0
= i[ρ̂, Ĥs (t)]+ κ1 L̂[â1 ]ρ̂+ κ2 L̂[â2 ]ρ̂+ γm D̂[b̂m ]ρ̂, (13)
dt 0 5 10 15
t( s)
where ρ̂ and Ĥs (t) are the density matrix and the Hamil-
tonian of the multimode interactions, respectively. κ1 (b) 1
and κ2 represent the decay rates of the cavities 1 and =15kHz
2, respectively. γm is the mechanical damping rate. =25kHz
L̂[Â]ρ̂ = (2Âρ̂† − † Âρ̂ − ρ̂† Â)/2. D̂[Â]ρ̂ = (nth + =35kHz

Fidelity
1)(2Âρ̂† − † Âρ̂ − ρ̂† Â)/2 + nth (2† ρ̂ − † ρ̂ − 0.5
ρ̂† )/2, where nth is the thermal phonon number of
the environment. Here, we choose the Hamiltonian Ĥ3
to calculate the master equation. We choose the param-
eters γm = 500 Hz and nth = 100 and change the decay
0
κ = κ1 = κ2 . We calculate the fidelity with the formula 0 1 2 3 4 5
F = h01|trm [ρ̂(t)]|01i. Here |01i represents the state t( s)
which there are zero and one photon in the cavities 1 and
2, respectively. trm [ρ̂(t)] is the reduced density matrix by
tracing the mechanical oscillator degree of freedom. The FIG. 6: Fidelity of the TQD process in the present of different
fidelities are plotted in Fig. 6(a) and (b) for the adiabatic dissipations κ in optomechanical interactions. (a) Fidelities
and fast protocols, respectively. The fidelities of the fast for the adiabatic quantum control. Here, we choose ν = 0.5
MHz. (b) Fidelities for the fast quantum control process.
protocol are higher than the adiabatic protocol. As the
Parameters are chosen as γm = 500 Hz and nth = 100.
process is accelerated, the total evolution time is shorter.

VI. CONCLUSION
No. 11474026, No. 11654003, No. 11505007, and No.
61675028).
To conclude, we have proposed a universal protocol to
realize a fast and robust quantum control for multimode
interactions in a quantum system by using STA. We also APPENDIX: TRANSITIONLESS QUANTUM
have applied this protocol in a practical photon-phonon- DRIVING ALGORITHM FOR MULTIMODE
photon interaction model for the quantum state transfer INTERACTIONS
in quantum information processing. Our protocol has the
following remarkable advantages. First, compared with Let us consider a quantum system with an arbitrary
the adiabatic protocol, it is faster as it can improve the time-dependent Hamiltonian Ĥ0 (t). The dynamical pro-
speed of a multimode interaction, which reduces more cess is described by
decoherence in the whole evolution process of the quan-
tum system. Second, under the fast process, there is Ĥ0 (t)|n(t)i = En (t)|n(t)i, (14)
no undesired transition between eigenmodes. Third, it is
also robust to some practical experimental imperfections. where |n(t)i and En (t) are the instantaneous eigenstate
These good features can effectively improve the feasibil- and the eigenenergies of Ĥ0 (t), respectively. According to
ity of practical applications of multimode interactions in the adiabatic approximation [3], the dynamical evolution
quantum information processing in experiment. of states driven by Ĥ0 (t) could be expressed as
 Z t Z t 
|ψn (t)i= exp −i dt′ En (t′ )− dt′ hn(t′ )|ṅ(t′ )i |n(t)i,
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 0 0
(15)
We thank Jing Qiu and Xiao-Dong Bai for useful dis-
cussion. This work was supported by the National Natu- where |ψn (t)i is the state of system at time t. Now,
ral Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 11674033, we seek a new Hamiltonian Ĥ(t) based on the reverse
 6

engineering approach to satisfy the Schrödinger equation be eliminated by Ĥcd (t). One can find infinitely many
Hamiltonians Ĥ(t) which differ from each other only by
i|ψ̇n (t)i = Ĥ(t)|ψn (t)i. (16) a phase. We disregard the phase factors [6, 23] and give
the simplest Hamiltonian derived with [10]
Any time-dependent unitary operator Û (t) is also given
by X
Ĥ(t) = i |ṅihn|. (21)
˙ n
iÛ (t) = Ĥ(t)Û (t), (17)
Here Ĥ is the couterdiabatic term and purely non-
and
diagonal in the basis {|ni}.
˙ In a three-mode quantum system, we should calculate
Ĥ(t) = iÛ (t)Û † (t). (18)
a new matrix M ′ (t) which determines the evolution of
In order to guarantee no transitions between the eigen- Heisenberg equations with no undesired transition. First,
states of Ĥ0 (t) for any time, the time-dependent unitary we assume the time-dependent evolution operator for
operator Û (t) should have the form M ′ (t) which is given by
 Z t Z t ˙
iÛ H (t) = M ′ (t)ÛH (t).

X
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ (22)
Û (t) = exp −i dt En (t ) − dt hn(t )|ṅ(t )i
n 0 0
One can solve the M ′ (t) matrix via the equation given
⊗|n(t)ihn(0)|. (19) by
According to Eq. (18), the new Hamiltonian is given by  
∂ †
M ′ (t) = i ÛH (t) ÛH (t)
X X ∂t
Ĥ(t) = |niEn hn| + i (|ṅihn| − hn|ṅi|nihn|)
X ∂ψn (t)
n n
= i | ihψn (t)|, (23)
= Ĥ0 (t) + Ĥcd (t), (20) n
∂t

where Ĥcd (t) is the counter-diabatic Hamiltonian. The

P
where ÛH (t) = n |ψn (t)ihψn (0)|. Here, |ψn (t)i is the
transitions of order exp(−1/ε) generated by Ĥ0 (t) can eigenmode of the three-mode quantum system.

[1] N. V. Vitanov, T. Halfmann, B. W. Shore, and K. (2003).

Bergmann, Laser-induced population transfer by adia- [9] M. Demirplak and S. A. Rice, Assisted adiabatic passage
batic passage techniques, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 52, revisited, J. Phys. Chem. B 109, 6838 (2005).
763 (2001). [10] M. V. Berry, Transitionless quantum driving, J. Phys. A:
[2] K. Bergmann, H. Theuer, and B. Shore, Coherent pop- Math. Theor. 42, 365303 (2009).
ulation transfer among quantum states of atoms and [11] X. Chen, I. Lizuain, A. Ruschhaupt, D. Guéry-Odelin,
molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1003 (1998). and J. G. Muga, Shortcut to adiabatic passage in two-
[3] M. Born and V. Fock, Beweis des Adiabatensatzes, Z. and three-Level atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 123003
Phys. 51, 165 (1928). (2010).
[4] J. P. Davis and P. Pechukas, Nonadiabatic transitions [12] X. Chen, E. Torrontegui, and J. G. Muga, Lewis-
induced by a time-dependent Hamiltonian in the semi- Riesenfeld invariants and transitionless quantum driving,
classical/adiabatic limit: the two-state case, J. Chem. Phys. Rev. A 83, 062116 (2011).
Phys. 64, 3129 (1976). [13] A. del Campo, Shortcuts to adiabaticity by counterdia-
[5] J. T. Hwang and P. Pechukas, The adiabatic theorem batic driving, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 100502 (2013).
in the complex plane and the semiclassical calculation of [14] S. Ibáñez, X. Chen, E. Torrontegui, J. G. Muga, and A.
nonadiabatic transition amplitudes, J. Chem. Phys. 67, Ruschhaup, Multiple Schrödinger pictures and dynamics
4640 (1977). in shortcuts to adiabaticity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 100403
[6] E. Torrontegui, S. Ibáñez, S. Martı́nez-Garaot, M. Mod- (2012).
ugno, A. Campo, D. Guéry-Odelin, A. Ruschhaupt, X. [15] S. Martinez-Garaot, E. Torrontegui, X. Chen, and J. G.
Chen, and J. G. Muga, Shortcuts to adiabaticity, Adv. Muga, Shortcuts to adiabaticity in three-level systems
Atom. Mol. Opt. Phys. 62, 117 (2013). using Lie transforms, Phys. Rev. A 89, 053408 (2014).
[7] H. R. Lewis and W. B. Riesenfeld, An exact quantum [16] A. Baksic, H. Ribeiro, and A. A. Clerk, Speeding up
theory of the time-dependent harmonic oscillator and of adiabatic quantum state transfer by using dressed states,
a charged particle in a time-dependent electromagnetic Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 230503 (2016)
field, J. Math. Phys. 10, 1458 (1969). [17] M. Lu, Y. Xia, L. T. Shen, and J. Song, An effec-
[8] M. Demirplak and S. A. Rice, Adiabatic population tive shortcut to adiabatic passage for fast quantum state
transfer with control fields, J. Phys. Chem. A 107, 9937 transfer in a cavity quantum electronic dynamics system,
 7

Laser Phys. 24, 105201 (2014). mans, P. C. Jerger, A. Auer, G. Burkard, A. A. Clerk,
[18] H. L. Mortensen, J. J. W. H. Sørensen, K. Mølmer, and D. D. Awschalom, Accelerated quantum control us-
and J. F. Sherson, Fast state transfer in a Λ-system: a ing superadiabatic dynamics in a solid-state lambda sys-
shortcut-to-adiabaticity approach to robust and resource tem, Nat. Phys. 13, 330–334 (2017).
optimized control, New J. Phys. 20, 025009 (2018). [33] M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt,
[19] M. Lu, Y. Xia, L. T. Shen, J. Song, and N. B. An, Cavity optomechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014).
Shortcuts to adiabatic passage for population transfer [34] M. Gao, F. C. Lei, C. G. Du, and G. L. Long, Self-
and maximum entanglement creation between two atoms sustained oscillation and dynamical multistability of op-
in a cavity, Phys. Rev. A 89, 012326 (2014). tomechanical systems in the extremely-large-amplitude
[20] S. He, S. L. Su, D. Y. Wang, W. M. Sun, C. H. Bai, A. regime, Phys. Rev. A 91, 013833 (2015).
D. Zhu, H. F. Wang, and S. Zhang, Efficient shortcuts [35] F. C. Lei, M. Gao, C. G. Du, Q. L. Jing, and G. L.
to adiabatic passage for three-dimensional entanglement Long, Three-pathway electromagnetically induced trans-
generation via transitionless quantum driving, Sci. Rep. parency in coupled-cavity optomechanical system, Opt.
6, 30929 (2016). Express 23, 11508–11517 (2015).
[21] A. C. Santos and M. S. Sarandy, Superadiabatic con- [36] X. Jiang, M. Wang, M. C. Kuzyk, T. Oo, G. L. Long,
trolled evolutions and universal quantum computation, and H. Wang, Chip-based silica microspheres for cavity
Sci. Rep. 5, 15775 (2015). optomechanics, Opt. Express 23, 27260–27265 (2015).
[22] Y. Liang, Q. C. Wu, S. L. Su, X. Ji, and S. Zhang, Short- [37] C. Dong, V. Fiore, M. C. Kuzyk, and H. Wang, Optome-
cuts to adiabatic passage for multiqubit controlled-phase chanical dark mode, Science 338, 1609–1613 (2012).
gate, Phys. Rev. A 91, 032304 (2015). [38] Y. D. Wang and A. A. Clerk, Using interference for high
[23] A. C. Santos, R. D. Silva, and M. S. Sarandy, Shortcut fidelity quantum state transfer in optomechanics, Phys.
to adiabatic gate teleportation, Phys. Rev. A 93, 012311 Rev. Lett. 108, 153603 (2012).
(2016). [39] L. Tian, Adiabatic state conversion and pulse transmis-
[24] X. K. Song, H. Zhang, Q. Ai, J. Qiu, and F. G. Deng, sion in optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108,
Shortcuts to adiabatic holonomic quantum computation 153604 (2012).
in decoherence-free subspace with transitionless quantum [40] L. Tian, Robust photon entanglement via quantum in-
driving algorithm, New J. Phys. 18, 023001 (2016). terference in optomechanical interfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett.
[25] Y. H. Kang, Y. H. Chen, Q. C. Wu, B. H. Huang, Y. 110, 233602 (2013).
Xia, and J. Song, Reverse engineering of a Hamiltonian [41] Y. D. Wang and A. A. Clerk, Reservoir-engineered en-
by designing the evolution operators, Sci. Rep. 6, 30151 tanglement in optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.
(2016). 110, 253601 (2013).
[26] X. K. Song, Q. Ai, J. Qiu, and F. G. Deng, Physically [42] Q. Lin, J. Rosenberg, D. Chang, R. Camacho, M. Eichen-
feasible three-level transitionless quantum driving with field, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, Coherent mixing
multiple Schrödinger dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 93, 052324 of mechanical excitations in nano-optomechanical struc-
(2016). tures, Nat. Photon. 4, 236 (2010).
[27] J. L. Wu, X. Ji, and S. Zhang, Shortcut to adiabatic [43] F. Massel, S. U. Cho, J.-M. Pirkkalainen, P. J. Hakonen,
passage in a three-level system via a chosen path and T. T. Heikkilä, and M. A. Sillanpää, Multimode circuit
its application in a complicated system, Opt. Exp. 25, optomechanics near the quantum limit, Nat. Commun.
21084-21093 (2017). 3, 987 (2012).
[28] M. G. Bason, M. Viteau, N. Malossi, P. Huillery, E. [44] N. Spethmann, J. Kohler, S. Schreppler, L. Buchmann,
Arimondo, D. Ciampini, R. Fazio, V. Giovannetti, R. and D. M. Stamper-Kurn, Cavity-mediated coupling of
Mannella, and O. Morsch, High-fidelity quantum driv- mechanical oscillators limited by quantum back-action,
ing, Nat. Phys. 8, 147–152 (2012). Nat. Phys. 12, 27 (2016).
[29] Y. X. Du, Z. T. Liang, Y. C. Li, X. X. Yue, Q. X. Lv, [45] M. C. Kuzyk and H. Wang, Controlling multimode op-
W. Huang, X. Chen, H. Yan, and S. L. Zhu, Experimen- tomechanical interactions via interference, Phys. Rev. A
tal realization of stimulated Raman shortcut-to-adiabatic 96, 023860 (2017).
passage with cold atoms, Nat. Commun. 7, 12479 (2016). [46] G. Vasilev, A. Kuhn, and N. Vitanov, Optimum pulse
[30] S. An, D. Lv, A. Campo, and K. Kim, Shortcuts to shapes for stimulated Raman adiabatic passage, Phys.
adiabaticity by counterdiabatic driving for trapped-ion Rev. A 80, 013417 (2009).
displacement in phase space, Nat. Commun. 7, 12999 [47] J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, H. J. Kimble, and H. Mabuchi,
(2016). Quantum state transfer and entanglement distribution
[31] J. Zhang, J. H. Shim, I. Niemeyer, T. Taniguchi, T. Ter- among distant nodes in a quantum network, Phys. Rev.
aji, H. Abe, S. Onoda, T. Yamamoto, T. Ohshima, J. Lett. 78, 3221 (1997).
Isoya, and D. Suter, Experimental implementation of as- [48] H. K. Li, X. X. Ren, Y. C. Liu, and Y. F. Xiao, Photon-
sisted quantum adiabatic passage in a single spin, Phys. photon interactions in a largely detuned optomechanical
Rev. Lett. 110, 240501 (2013). cavity, Phys. Rev. A 88, 053850 (2013).
[32] B. B. Zhou, A. Baksic, H. Ribeiro, C. G. Yale, F. J. Here-