PreprintCited by 4Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and CryptographyParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Advances in compilation for quantum hardware -- A demonstration of magic state distillation and repeat-until-success protocols

Open access

Abstract

Fault-tolerant protocols enable large and precise quantum algorithms. Many such protocols rely on a feed-forward processing of data, enabled by a hybrid of quantum and classical logic. Representing the control structure of such programs can be a challenge. Here we explore two such fault-tolerant subroutines and analyze the performance of the subroutines using Quantum Intermediate Representation (QIR) as their underlying intermediate representation. First, we look at QIR's ability to leverage the LLVM compiler toolchain to unroll the quantum iteration logic required to perform magic state distillation on the $[[5,1,3]]$ quantum error-correcting code as originally introduced by Bravyi and Kitaev [Phys. Rev. A 71, 022316 (2005)]. This allows us to not only realize the first implementation of a real-time magic state distillation protocol on quantum hardware, but also demonstrate QIR's ability to optimize complex program structures without degrading machine performance. Next, we investigate a different fault-tolerant protocol that was first introduced by Paetznick and Svore [arXiv:1311.1074 (2013)], that reduces the amount of non-Clifford gates needed for a particular algorithm. We look at four different implementations of this two-stage repeat-until-success algorithm to analyze the performance changes as the results of programming choices. We find the QIR offers a viable representation for a compiled high-level program that performs nearly as well as a hand-optimized version written directly in quantum assembly. Both of these results demonstrate QIR's ability to accurately and efficiently expand the complexity of fault-tolerant protocols that can be realized today on quantum hardware.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2310.12106

Cites

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?

  • Most gate-level quantum programs, commonly referred to as 'dynamic circuits', are written right now as a flat series of gates with certain gates conditioned on measurements.

    “This is by strong contrast to the way most gate-level quantum programs, commonly referred to as ‘dynamic circuits’42, are written right now—as a flat series of gates with certain gates conditioned on measurements.”

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Brown, N. C., Campora, J. P., Granade, C., Heim, B., Wernli, S., Ryan-Anderson, C., Lucchetti, D., Paetznick, A., Roetteler, M., Svore, K., & Chernoguzov, A.
Affiliations
  • Quantinuum (United States) (US)
  • Microsoft (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4387801634
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
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 Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Keywords
quantum circuit compilation, magic state distillation, fault-tolerant quantum computing, non-Clifford gates, quantum error correction, LLVM

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