Pareto-Efficient Quantum Circuit Simulation Using Tensor Contraction Deferral
Open accessAbstract
With the current rate of progress in quantum computing technologies, systems with more than 50 qubits will soon become reality. Computing ideal quantum state amplitudes for circuits of such and larger sizes is a fundamental step to assess both the correctness, performance, and scaling behavior of quantum algorithms and the fidelities of quantum devices. However, resource requirements for such calculations on classical computers grow exponentially. We show that deferring tensor contractions can extend the boundaries of what can be computed on classical systems. To demonstrate this technique, we present results obtained from a calculation of the complete set of output amplitudes of a universal random circuit with depth 27 in a 2D lattice of $7 \times 7$ qubits, and an arbitrarily selected slice of $2^{37}$ amplitudes of a universal random circuit with depth 23 in a 2D lattice of $8 \times 7$ qubits. Combining our methodology with other decomposition approaches found in the literature, we show that we can simulate $7 \times 7$-qubit random circuits to arbitrary depth by leveraging secondary storage. These calculations were thought to be impossible due to resource requirements.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
50 qubits is a significant milestone because it is beyond what can be simulated by brute force using the most powerful existing digital supercomputers.
“50 qubits is a significant milestone, because that's beyond what can be simulated by brute force using the most powerful existing digital supercomputers.”
From Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond (2018) · cites this paper as [13]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 48
- Authors
- Pednault, E., Gunnels, J. A., Nannicini, G., Horesh, L., Magerlein, T., Solomonik, E., Draeger, E. W., Holland, E. T., & Wisnieff, R.
- Affiliations
- IBM (United States) (US)
- Tufts University (US)
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2017
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1710.05867
- OpenAlex
- W3080724058
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Energy
- 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, Pareto optimality, random quantum circuits, external memory, resource requirements
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