CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 103Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Mechanics and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Benchmarking a trapped-ion quantum computer with 30 qubits

Open access
Chen, Jwo-Sy, Nielsen, Erik, Ebert, Matthew, Inlek, Volkan, Wright, Kenneth, Chaplin, Vandiver, Maksymov, Andrii, Páez, Eduardo, Poudel, Amrit, Maunz, Peter, Gamble, John·2024·Quantum
DOI 10.22331/q-2024-11-07-1516
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Quantum computers are rapidly becoming more capable, with dramatic increases in both qubit count \cite{kim2023evidence} and quality \cite{moses2023race}. Among different hardware approaches, trapped-ion quantum processors are a leading technology for quantum computing, with established high-fidelity operations and architectures with promising scaling. Here, we demonstrate and thoroughly benchmark the IonQ Forte system: configured as a single-chain 30-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer with all-to-all operations. We assess the performance of our quantum computer operation at the component level via direct randomized benchmarking (DRB) across all 30 choose 2 = 435 gate pairs. We then show the results of application-oriented \cite{IonQ_AQ20_2022}\cite{qedcPeerReviewed} benchmarks and show that the system passes the suite of algorithmic qubit (AQ) benchmarks up to #AQ 29. Finally, we use our component-level benchmarking to build a system-level model to predict the application benchmarking data through direct simulation. While we find that the system-level model correlates with the experiment in predicting application circuit performance, we note quantitative discrepancies indicating significant out-of-model errors, leading to higher predicted performance than what is observed. This highlights that as quantum computers move toward larger and higher-quality devices, characterization becomes more challenging, suggesting future work required to push performance further.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.22331/q-2024-11-07-1516

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 33 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Rui-Rui Li, Yi-Long Chen, Ran He, Shu-Qian Chen, Wen-Hao Qi, Jin-Ming Cui, Yun-Feng Huang, Chuan-Feng Li, and Guang-Can Guo. ``A low-crosstalk double-side addressing system using acousto-optic deflectors for atomic ion qubits'' (2023). arXiv:2306.01307. · arXiv
  2. Andrii Maksymov, Jason Nguyen, Yunseong Nam, and Igor Markov. ``Enhancing quantum computer performance via symmetrization'' (2023). arXiv:2301.07233. · arXiv
  3. Anthony M. Polloreno, Arnaud Carignan-Dugas, Jordan Hines, Robin Blume-Kohout, Kevin Young, and Timothy Proctor. ``A theory of direct randomized benchmarking'' (2023). arXiv:2302.13853. · arXiv
  4. Sergei V. Isakov, Dvir Kafri, Orion Martin, Catherine Vollgraff Heidweiller, Wojciech Mruczkiewicz, Matthew P. Harrigan, Nicholas C. Rubin, Ross Thomson, Michael Broughton, Kevin Kissell, Evan Peters, Erik Gustafson, Andy C. Y Li, Henry Lamm, Gabriel Perdue, Alan K. Ho, Doug Strain, and Sergio Boixo. ``Simulations of quantum circuits with approximate noise using qsim and cirq'' (2021). arXiv:2111.02396. · arXiv
  5. David C McKay, Ian Hincks, Emily J Pritchett, Malcolm Carroll, Luke CG Govia, and Seth T Merkel. ``Benchmarking quantum processor performance at scale'' (2023). arXiv:2311.05933. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–103 of 103

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chen, J.-S., Nielsen, E., Ebert, M., Inlek, V., Wright, K., Chaplin, V., Maksymov, A., Páez, E., Poudel, A., Maunz, P., & Gamble, J.
Affiliations
  • IonQ (United States) (US)
  • IonQ, College Park, MD 20740
ORCID
Venue
Quantum
Publisher
Verein zur Forderung des Open Access Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften
Published
2024-11-07
Volume
8
Pages
1516
ISSN
2521-327X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.22331/q-2024-11-07-1516
OpenAlex
W4404140215
Cited by
103
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 7
FWCI
15.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Quantum (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
Keywords
trapped-ion quantum computer, quantum hardware characterization

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