Current standing of qubit research

[Verdict]

Good day everyone,
I apologize if this is not the correct forum; in some way it is a homework question but not of the ordinary form. This semester I will be writing a ~3000 word paper on the topic of the current standing in qubit research, where I will be describing and comparing various different approaches/researches to creating qubits to be used in a quantum computer. I am a third year bachelor of physics student, so I do understand 'some' of the technical parts, but overall it will not be that in depth.
Now my question is mostly if you could help me out and point me in the right direction. As this is a topic where you can't (as far as I can tell) find a simple overview of different approaches and go from there, I'm having some issues creating a comprehensive list of techniques that I will focus on. One idea that I had was looking at some of the recent conferences on the topic, as that will surely list several different approaches, but I haven't been able to find a suitable one. This might just be me though, I've never actually browsed through conferences before and I don't know what the actual terms would be that they would use to describe this kind of research.

One of the things that I will look into is he usage of nitrogen-vacancy (NV) center in diamond, as I found it rather intriguing and (as far as I can tell) it has quite some potential. Another thing that comes to mind is the majorana fermion, and maybe quantum dots. But apart from that I am a bit lost. I would be very grateful if you could help me out and suggest some other interesting approaches, and again I apologize if this is not the correct place to talk about this. I suppose it could lead to a rather interesting discussion as well, so please do post your own opinions on the subject!

Kind regards

 

[f95toli]

You need to have a look at superconducting qubits as well since this is one if the leading candidates and is a scalable technique.
There was a fairly recent review in Nature (or perhaps it was Science) which should explain the basics and the state-of-the art (although this is a rapidly developing field)

 

[Verdict]

Thank you very much! That's definitely also something I will have to include. That article has proven to be elusive so far, but that would indeed be a very good starting point.

Edit: Could it be that you were referring to http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7285/full/nature08812.html ?

 

[f95toli]

The review was published in Science earlier this year

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6124/1169.full

Here is an older review, note that things have moved on since this was published

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7198/full/nature07128.html