-
Non-Local Phase Estimation with a Rydberg-Superconducting Qubit Hybrid
Authors:
Juan C. Boschero,
Niels M. P. Neumann,
Ward van der Schoot,
Frank Phillipson
Abstract:
Distributed quantum computing (DQC) is crucial for high-volume quantum processing in the NISQ era. Many different technologies are utilized to implement a quantum computer, each with a different advantages and disadvantages. Various research is performed on how to implement DQC within a certain technology, but research on DQC between different technologies is rather limited. In this work, we contr…
▽ More
Distributed quantum computing (DQC) is crucial for high-volume quantum processing in the NISQ era. Many different technologies are utilized to implement a quantum computer, each with a different advantages and disadvantages. Various research is performed on how to implement DQC within a certain technology, but research on DQC between different technologies is rather limited. In this work, we contribute to this latter research line, by implementing the Quantum Phase Estimation algorithm on a superconducting-resonator-atom hybrid system. This system combines a Rydberg atom qubit, as well as a superconducting flux qubit system to perform the algorithm. In addition, Hamiltonian dynamics are studied to analyze noise sources, after which quantum optimal control (GRAPE) is used to optimize gate construction. The results show tradeoffs between GRAPE step size, iterations and noise level.
△ Less
Submitted 23 May, 2025;
originally announced May 2025.
-
Systematic benchmarking of quantum computers: status and recommendations
Authors:
Jeanette Miriam Lorenz,
Thomas Monz,
Jens Eisert,
Daniel Reitzner,
Félicien Schopfer,
Frédéric Barbaresco,
Krzysztof Kurowski,
Ward van der Schoot,
Thomas Strohm,
Jean Senellart,
Cécile M. Perrault,
Martin Knufinke,
Ziyad Amodjee,
Mattia Giardini
Abstract:
Architectures for quantum computing can only be scaled up when they are accompanied by suitable benchmarking techniques. The document provides a comprehensive overview of the state and recommendations for systematic benchmarking of quantum computers. Benchmarking is crucial for assessing the performance of quantum computers, including the hardware, software, as well as algorithms and applications.…
▽ More
Architectures for quantum computing can only be scaled up when they are accompanied by suitable benchmarking techniques. The document provides a comprehensive overview of the state and recommendations for systematic benchmarking of quantum computers. Benchmarking is crucial for assessing the performance of quantum computers, including the hardware, software, as well as algorithms and applications. The document highlights key aspects such as component-level, system-level, software-level, HPC-level, and application-level benchmarks. Component-level benchmarks focus on the performance of individual qubits and gates, while system-level benchmarks evaluate the entire quantum processor. Software-level benchmarks consider the compiler's efficiency and error mitigation techniques. HPC-level and cloud benchmarks address integration with classical systems and cloud platforms, respectively. Application-level benchmarks measure performance in real-world use cases. The document also discusses the importance of standardization to ensure reproducibility and comparability of benchmarks, and highlights ongoing efforts in the quantum computing community towards establishing these benchmarks. Recommendations for future steps emphasize the need for developing standardized evaluation routines and integrating benchmarks with broader quantum technology activities.
△ Less
Submitted 6 March, 2025;
originally announced March 2025.
-
Distributed Quantum Computing: Applications and Challenges
Authors:
Juan C. Boschero,
Niels M. P. Neumann,
Ward van der Schoot,
Thom Sijpesteijn,
Robert Wezeman
Abstract:
Quantum computing is presently undergoing rapid development to achieve a significant speedup promised in certain applications. Nonetheless, scaling quantum computers remains a formidable engineering challenge, prompting exploration of alternative methods to achieve the promised quantum advantage. An example is given by the concept of distributed quantum computing, which aims to scale quantum compu…
▽ More
Quantum computing is presently undergoing rapid development to achieve a significant speedup promised in certain applications. Nonetheless, scaling quantum computers remains a formidable engineering challenge, prompting exploration of alternative methods to achieve the promised quantum advantage. An example is given by the concept of distributed quantum computing, which aims to scale quantum computers through the linking of different individual quantum computers. Additionally, distributed quantum computing opens the way to new applications on the longer term. This study seeks to give an overview of this technology on an application-level, considering both use cases and implementation considerations. In this way, this work aims to push forward the field of distributed quantum computing, aiming for real-world distributed quantum systems in the near future.
△ Less
Submitted 1 October, 2024;
originally announced October 2024.
-
QuAS: Quantum Application Score for benchmarking the utility of quantum computers
Authors:
Koen J. Mesman,
Ward van der Schoot,
Matthias Möller,
Niels M. P. Neumann
Abstract:
Benchmarking quantum computers helps to quantify them and bringing the technology to the market. Various application-level metrics exist to benchmark a quantum device at an application level. This paper presents a revised holistic scoring method called the Quantum Application Score (QuAS) incorporating strong points of previous metrics, such as QPack and the Q-score. We discuss how to integrate bo…
▽ More
Benchmarking quantum computers helps to quantify them and bringing the technology to the market. Various application-level metrics exist to benchmark a quantum device at an application level. This paper presents a revised holistic scoring method called the Quantum Application Score (QuAS) incorporating strong points of previous metrics, such as QPack and the Q-score. We discuss how to integrate both and thereby obtain an application-level metric that better quantifies the practical utility of quantum computers. We evaluate the new metric on different hardware platforms such as D-Wave and IBM as well as quantum simulators of Quantum Inspire and Rigetti.
△ Less
Submitted 6 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Noise robustness of a multiparty quantum summation protocol
Authors:
Antón Rodríguez Otero,
Niels M. P. Neumann,
Ward van der Schoot,
Robert Wezeman
Abstract:
Connecting quantum computers to a quantum network opens a wide array of new applications, such as securely performing computations on distributed data sets. Near-term quantum networks are noisy, however, and hence correctness and security of protocols are not guaranteed. To study the impact of noise, we consider a multiparty summation protocol with imperfect shared entangled states. We study analy…
▽ More
Connecting quantum computers to a quantum network opens a wide array of new applications, such as securely performing computations on distributed data sets. Near-term quantum networks are noisy, however, and hence correctness and security of protocols are not guaranteed. To study the impact of noise, we consider a multiparty summation protocol with imperfect shared entangled states. We study analytically the impact of both depolarising and dephasing noise on this protocol and the noise patterns arising in the probability distributions. We conclude by eliminating the need for a trusted third party in the protocol using Shamir's secret sharing.
△ Less
Submitted 29 April, 2024; v1 submitted 26 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
Evaluating Three Levels of Quantum Metrics on Quantum-Inspire Hardware
Authors:
Ward van der Schoot,
Robert Wezeman,
Pieter Thijs Eendebak,
Niels M. P. Neumann,
Frank Phillipson
Abstract:
With the rise of quantum computing, many quantum devices have been developed and many more devices are being developed as we speak. This begs the question of which device excels at which tasks and how to compare these different quantum devices with one another. The answer is given by quantum metrics, of which many exist today already. Different metrics focus on different aspects of (quantum) devic…
▽ More
With the rise of quantum computing, many quantum devices have been developed and many more devices are being developed as we speak. This begs the question of which device excels at which tasks and how to compare these different quantum devices with one another. The answer is given by quantum metrics, of which many exist today already. Different metrics focus on different aspects of (quantum) devices and choosing the right metric to benchmark one device against another is a difficult choice. In this paper we aim to give an overview of this zoo of metrics by grouping established metrics in three levels: component level, system level and application level. With this characterisation we also mention what the merits and uses are for each of the different levels. In addition, we evaluate these metrics on the Starmon-5 device of Quantum-Inspire through the cloud access, giving the most complete benchmark of a quantum device from an user experience to date.
△ Less
Submitted 2 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Extending the Q-score to an Application-level Quantum Metric Framework
Authors:
Ward van der Schoot,
Robert Wezeman,
Niels M. P. Neumann,
Frank Phillipson,
Rob Kooij
Abstract:
Evaluating the performance of quantum devices is an important step towards scaling quantum devices and eventually using them in practice. The great number of available quantum metrics and the different hardware technologies used to develop quantum computers complicate this evaluation. In addition, different computational paradigms implement quantum operations in different ways. A prominent quantum…
▽ More
Evaluating the performance of quantum devices is an important step towards scaling quantum devices and eventually using them in practice. The great number of available quantum metrics and the different hardware technologies used to develop quantum computers complicate this evaluation. In addition, different computational paradigms implement quantum operations in different ways. A prominent quantum metric is given by the Q-score metric of Atos. This metric was originally introduced as a standalone way to benchmark devices using the Max-Cut problem. In this work, we show that the Q-score defines a framework of quantum metrics, which allows benchmarking using different problems, user settings and solvers. To showcase the applicability of the framework, we showcase a second Q-score in this framework, called the Q-score Max-Clique. This yields, to our knowledge, the first application-level metric capable of natively comparing three different paradigms of quantum computing. This metric is evaluated on these computational quantum paradigms -- quantum annealing, gate-based quantum computing, and photonic quantum computing -- and the results are compared to those obtained by classical solvers.
△ Less
Submitted 1 October, 2024; v1 submitted 1 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
Evaluating the Q-score of Quantum Annealers
Authors:
Ward van der Schoot,
Daan Leermakers,
Robert Wezeman,
Niels Neumann,
Frank Phillipson
Abstract:
We report the Atos Q-score for D-Wave's quantum devices, classical algorithms and hybrid quantum-classical solver. Computing the Q-score entails solving the Max-Cut problem for increasingly large graphs. This work presents the first computation of the Q-score on a quantum device and shows how these quantum devices compare to classical devices at solving optimisation problems. We use D-Wave's stand…
▽ More
We report the Atos Q-score for D-Wave's quantum devices, classical algorithms and hybrid quantum-classical solver. Computing the Q-score entails solving the Max-Cut problem for increasingly large graphs. This work presents the first computation of the Q-score on a quantum device and shows how these quantum devices compare to classical devices at solving optimisation problems. We use D-Wave's standard methods out of the box with a time limit of 60 seconds. The Q-score for D-Wave's 2000Q and Advantage devices are 70 and 140, respectively. The Q-score for two of D-Wave's classical algorithms, based on tabu search and simulated annealing respectively, are 2,300 and 5,800. Finally, we report the out-of-the-box hybrid approach to have a Q-score of 12,500.
△ Less
Submitted 16 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
