64-qubit quantum circuit simulation
Open accessAbstract
Classical simulations of quantum circuits are limited in both space and time when the qubit count is above 50, the realm where quantum supremacy reigns. However, recently, for the low depth circuit with more than 50 qubits, there are several methods of simulation proposed by teams at Google and IBM. Here, we present a scheme of simulation which can extract a large amount of measurement outcomes within a short time, achieving a 64-qubit simulation of a universal random circuit of depth 22 using a 128-node cluster, and 56- and 42-qubit circuits on a single PC. We also estimate that a 72-qubit circuit of depth 23 can be simulated in about 16 h on a supercomputer identical to that used by the IBM team. Moreover, the simulation processes are exceedingly separable, hence parallelizable, involving just a few inter-process communications. Our work enables simulating more qubits with less hardware burden and provides a new perspective for classical simulations.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Circuits with a similar form to random circuits appear in near-term algorithms like quantum adiabatic optimization algorithms and variational quantum eigensolvers.
“In addition, circuits with a similar form appear in near-term algorithms like quantum adiabatic optimization algorithms [17] and variational quantum eigensolvers [18].”
From Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits (2019) · cites this paper as [18]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.
Superconducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance
Barends, R., Kelly, J., Megrant, A., Veitia, A., Sank, D., Jeffrey, E., White, T. C., Mutus, J., Fowler, A. G., Campbell, B., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13171 · Cited by 1,733 · see citing works
Self-citationCharacterizing quantum supremacy in near-term devices
Boixo, S., Isakov, S. V., Smelyanskiy, V. N., Babbush, R., Ding, N., Jiang, Z., Bremner, M. J., Martinis, J. M., & Neven, H. (2018) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/s41567-018-0124-x · Cited by 1,175 · see citing works
Hosur, P., Qi, X.-L., Roberts, D. A., & Yoshida, B. (2016) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep02(2016)004 · Cited by 718 · see citing works
Random Quantum Circuits are Approximate 2-designs
Harrow, A. W., & Low, R. A. (2009) · Communications in Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1007/s00220-009-0873-6 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Rapid High-fidelity Multiplexed Readout of Superconducting Qubits
Heinsoo, J., Andersen, C. K., Remm, A., Krinner, S., Walter, T., Salathé, Y., Gasparinetti, S., Besse, J.-C., Potočnik, A., Wallraff, A. J., et al. (2018) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.10.034040 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Unsupervised Machine Learning on a Hybrid Quantum Computer
Otterbach, J. S., Manenti, R., Alidoust, N., Bestwick, A., Block, M., Bloom, B., Caldwell, S., Didier, N., Fried, E. S., Hong, S., et al. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1712.05771 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Pseudo-Random Unitary Operators for Quantum Information Processing
Emerson, J., Weinstein, Y. S., Saraceno, M., Lloyd, S., & Cory, D. G. (2003) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1090790 · Cited by 228 · see citing works
Cao, G., Li, H.-O., Tu, T., Wang, L., Zhou, C. J., Xiao, M., Guo, G., Jiang, H. W., & Guo, G. (2013) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms2412 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Self-citationqHiPSTER: The Quantum High Performance Software Testing EnvironmentPreprint
Smelyanskiy, M., Sawaya, N. P. D., & Aspuru‐Guzik, A. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1601.07195 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Simulation of low-depth quantum circuits as complex undirected graphical modelsPreprint
Boixo, S., Isakov, S. V., Smelyanskiy, V., & Neven, H. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1712.05384 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Breaking the 49-Qubit Barrier in the Simulation of Quantum Circuits
Pednault, E., Gunnels, J. A., Nannicini, G., Lior Horesh, C., Magerlein, T., Solomonik, E., & Wisnieff, R. (2018) · OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Convergence Rates for Arbitrary Statistical Moments of Random Quantum Circuits
Brown, W., & Viola, L. (2010) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.104.250501 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Conditional rotation of two strongly coupled semiconductor charge qubits
Li, H.-O., Cao, G., Yu, G., et al. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms8681 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
The emergence of typical entanglement in two-party random processes
Dahlsten, O., Oliveira, R. I., & Plenio, M. B. (2007) · Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · doi:10.1088/1751-8113/40/28/s16 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Hypersensitivity to perturbations in the quantum baker’s map
Schack, R., & Caves, C. M. (1993) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.71.525 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Pareto-Efficient Quantum Circuit Simulation Using Tensor Contraction Deferral
Pednault, E., Gunnels, J. A., Nannicini, G., Horesh, L., Magerlein, T., Solomonik, E., Draeger, E. W., Holland, E. T., & Wisnieff, R. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1710.05867 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Efficiency of producing random unitary matrices with quantum circuits
Arnaud, L., & Braun, D. (2008) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.78.062329 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Controlled Quantum Operations of a Semiconductor Three-Qubit System
Li, H.-O., Cao, G., Yu, G., Xiao, M., Guo, G., Jiang, H. W., & Guo, G. (2018) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.9.024015 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Self-citationHypersensitivity and chaos signatures in the quantum baker's maps
Scott, A. J., Brun, T. A., Caves, C. M., & Schack, R. (2006) · Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General · doi:10.1088/0305-4470/39/43/002 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [9][9] Aaronson S, Chen L. Complexity-theoretic foundations of quantum supremacy experiments. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.05903 (2016). - · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor
Arute, F., Arya, K., Babbush, R., Bacon, D., Bardin, J. C., Barends, R., Biswas, R., Boixo, S., Brandao, F. G. S. L., Buell, D. A., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5 · Cited by 7,720 · see citing works
Self-citationValidating quantum computers using randomized model circuits
Cross, A. W., Bishop, L. S., Sheldon, S., Nation, P. D., & Gambetta, J. M. (2019) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.100.032328 · Cited by 704 · see citing works
Potential of quantum computing for drug discovery
Cao, Y., Romero, J., & Aspuru-Guzik, A. (2018) · IBM Journal of Research and Development · doi:10.1147/jrd.2018.2888987 · Cited by 357 · see citing works
Computational advantage of quantum random sampling
Hangleiter, D., & Eisert, J. (2023) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.95.035001 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
Biology and medicine in the landscape of quantum advantages
Cordier, B. A., Sawaya, N. P. D., Guerreschi, G. G., & McWeeney, S. K. (2022) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2022.0541 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
- Authors
- Chen, Z.-Y., Zhou, Q., Xue, C., Yang, X., Guo, G.-C., & Guo, G.-P.
- Affiliations
- University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Guo, Guang-Can
- Guo, Guo-Ping
- Venue
- Science Bulletin
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-08
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 964-971
- ISSN
- 2095-9273 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2789231139
- Cited by
- 136
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 10.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- 中国科学通报：英文版 (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (11625419)
- National Basic Research Program of China (2016YFA0301700)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Keywords
- quantum circuit simulation, classical simulation of quantum circuits, low-depth quantum circuits, random quantum circuits, parallel simulation, scalability, quantum advantage
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
