pith. sign in

arxiv: 2504.21172 · v2 · submitted 2025-04-29 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.AR

Iceberg Beyond the Tip: Co-Compilation of a Quantum Error Detection Code and a Quantum Algorithm

Yuwei Jin , Zichang He , Tianyi Hao , Sivaprasad Omanakuttan , David Amaro , Swamit Tannu , Ruslan Shaydulin , Marco Pistoia This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 17:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.AR
keywords quantum error detectionIceberg codeQAOAco-optimizationfault-tolerant gadgetspost-selectiontree searchtrapped-ion hardware
0
0 comments X

The pith

Co-optimizing QAOA circuits with flexible Iceberg error-detection gadgets improves success probability from 44 percent to 65 percent and post-selection from 4 percent to 33 percent at 22 qubits.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that error-detecting codes can be made more useful for quantum algorithms when their encoding circuits are designed with flexibility and then jointly optimized with the algorithm. For the Iceberg code on trapped-ion hardware the authors introduce new gadgets that support this joint search via tree search, allowing the combined circuit to discard fewer runs while still catching errors. A sympathetic reader would care because the method turns many noisy shots into a more accurate estimate of the desired observable by keeping only the post-selected samples. The reported hardware runs reach these gains with 330 algorithmic two-qubit gates and demonstrate better performance than the bare unencoded circuit up to 34 algorithmic qubits.

Core claim

By introducing flexible fault-tolerant gadgets for the [[k+2, k, 2]] Iceberg code and co-optimizing them together with a QAOA circuit through tree search, the resulting compiled circuits raise QAOA success probability from 44 percent to 65 percent and post-selection rate from 4 percent to 33 percent at 22 algorithmic qubits on the Quantinuum H2-1 device, using 330 algorithmic and 744 physical two-qubit gates; the same approach also yields better-than-unencoded results for up to 34 algorithmic qubits with 510 algorithmic and 1140 physical two-qubit gates.

What carries the argument

Flexible fault-tolerant gadgets for the Iceberg code that admit tree-search co-optimization with the algorithmic circuit while preserving the code's error-detection properties.

If this is right

  • Post-selection on Iceberg-detected errors can be made efficient enough to outperform bare QAOA at moderate problem sizes.
  • Tree search supplies a systematic way to trade gadget overhead against algorithmic depth for other variational algorithms.
  • Trapped-ion processors can run larger QAOA instances before the accumulated physical errors overwhelm the detection budget.
  • The same co-compilation pattern can be applied whenever an error-detecting code supplies multiple equivalent gadget realizations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar flexible-gadget designs may exist for other distance-2 codes, opening the same co-optimization route beyond the Iceberg family.
  • The observed scaling suggests that hardware-tailored co-design could become routine for near-term error-detection experiments on any platform that supports mid-circuit measurement.
  • If the tree-search cost remains modest, the method could be embedded inside existing quantum compilers to automate the choice between encoded and unencoded layouts.

Load-bearing premise

The tree-search procedure never produces a gadget variant that loses fault tolerance, so that every detected error still corresponds to an actual fault rather than an artifact of the optimization.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the logical error rate on the co-optimized circuit that exceeds the rate measured on the original unoptimized Iceberg gadgets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.21172 by David Amaro, Marco Pistoia, Ruslan Shaydulin, Sivaprasad Omanakuttan, Swamit Tannu, Tianyi Hao, Yuwei Jin, Zichang He.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of our proposed co-compilation pipeline for quantum algorithms and quantum error detection. By leveraging [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The circuit encoded in the Iceberg code from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: New Set of Fault-tolerant Gadgets. (a) New initializa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Optimized mixer with Z2 symmetry property. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Uncompiled graph construction for the depth esti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Search space expanding with syndrome gadget for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Depth comparison of different circuits, including the unencoded circuit, the proposed co-optimized Iceberg circuit, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: QAOA performance for a 𝑘 = 22 3-regular graph instance with varying QAOA depth 𝑝 is evaluated. The en￾coded circuits include three syndrome measurements. The proposed co-optimized circuit consistently outperforms the baseline circuit. The improvement in the approximation ra￾tio over the unencoded circuits becomes more pronounced at higher 𝑝 values. The post-selection rates of the proposed compilation remai… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The proposed pipeline enables new state-of-the-art hardware results on Quantinuum H2-1. (a) The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Iceberg enhances the benchmarking of QAOA. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The rapid progress in quantum hardware is expected to make them viable tools for the study of quantum algorithms in the near term. The timeline to useful algorithmic experimentation can be accelerated by techniques that use many noisy shots to produce an accurate estimate of the observable of interest. One such technique is to encode the quantum circuit using an error detection code and discard the samples for which an error has been detected. An underexplored property of error-detecting codes is the flexibility in the circuit encoding and fault-tolerant gadgets, which enables their co-optimization with the algorthmic circuit. However, standard circuit optimization tools cannot be used to exploit this flexibility as optimization must preserve the fault-tolerance of the gadget. In this work, we focus on the $[[k+2, k, 2]]$ Iceberg quantum error detection code, which is tailored to trapped-ion quantum processors. We design new flexible fault-tolerant gadgets for the Iceberg code, which we then co-optimize with the algorithmic circuit for the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) using tree search. By co-optimizing the QAOA circuit and the Iceberg gadgets, we achieve an improvement in QAOA success probability from $44\%$ to $65\%$ and an increase in post-selection rate from $4\%$ to $33\%$ at 22 algorithmic qubits, utilizing 330 algorithmic two-qubit gates and 744 physical two-qubit gates on the Quantinuum H2-1 quantum computer, compared to the previous state-of-the-art hardware demonstration. Furthermore, we demonstrate better-than-unencoded performance for up to 34 algorithmic qubits, employing 510 algorithmic two-qubit gates and 1140 physical two-qubit gates.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces new flexible fault-tolerant gadgets for the [[k+2, k, 2]] Iceberg error detection code and uses tree search to co-optimize these gadgets jointly with a QAOA circuit. On the Quantinuum H2-1 trapped-ion processor, the co-optimized implementation reports a QAOA success probability increase from 44% to 65% and post-selection rate increase from 4% to 33% at 22 algorithmic qubits (330 algorithmic two-qubit gates, 744 physical two-qubit gates), with better-than-unencoded performance demonstrated up to 34 algorithmic qubits (510 algorithmic two-qubit gates, 1140 physical two-qubit gates).

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work is significant because it supplies concrete hardware evidence that co-compilation of an error-detecting code with a variational algorithm can measurably improve both success probability and post-selection yield on current trapped-ion hardware. The reported gate counts and performance deltas provide a useful benchmark for near-term error-detection strategies.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (Flexible fault-tolerant gadgets and tree-search co-optimization): The manuscript states that the tree search preserves fault tolerance of the new Iceberg gadgets, yet provides no explicit post-optimization verification that every weight-1 error either raises a detection flag or produces no logical error. Because the search is heuristic and operates on the combined circuit, an undetected logical error path (e.g., a single CNOT or measurement error that flips a stabilizer without flagging) would invalidate the attribution of the observed 44%→65% success-probability gain to error detection rather than to circuit restructuring or gate-count reduction.
  2. [Results section] Results section, 22-qubit and 34-qubit experiments: The claim of better-than-unencoded performance rests on a direct comparison, but the manuscript does not state whether the unencoded baseline used identical QAOA parameters, circuit depth, or compilation settings as the encoded version. Without this control, it is impossible to isolate the contribution of the Iceberg detection from other optimizations.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: 'algorthmic' is a typographical error and should read 'algorithmic'.
  2. [Methods] Notation: The distinction between 'algorithmic' and 'physical' two-qubit gates is used throughout but never defined in a single location; a brief clarifying sentence in the methods would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which help clarify the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below and propose revisions where appropriate to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Flexible fault-tolerant gadgets and tree-search co-optimization): The manuscript states that the tree search preserves fault tolerance of the new Iceberg gadgets, yet provides no explicit post-optimization verification that every weight-1 error either raises a detection flag or produces no logical error. Because the search is heuristic and operates on the combined circuit, an undetected logical error path (e.g., a single CNOT or measurement error that flips a stabilizer without flagging) would invalidate the attribution of the observed 44%→65% success-probability gain to error detection rather than to circuit restructuring or gate-count reduction.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit post-optimization verification strengthens the claim that fault tolerance is preserved. The tree search operates under explicit constraints derived from the Iceberg gadget construction rules (detailed in §4) that forbid any modification introducing an undetected weight-1 logical error; these constraints were enforced at every step of the search. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that the manuscript does not present a separate verification pass enumerating all weight-1 errors on the final optimized circuits. In the revised manuscript we will add an appendix containing this verification for the 22-qubit and 34-qubit instances, confirming that every weight-1 error either triggers a detection flag or produces no logical error on the encoded qubits. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results section] Results section, 22-qubit and 34-qubit experiments: The claim of better-than-unencoded performance rests on a direct comparison, but the manuscript does not state whether the unencoded baseline used identical QAOA parameters, circuit depth, or compilation settings as the encoded version. Without this control, it is impossible to isolate the contribution of the Iceberg detection from other optimizations.

    Authors: The unencoded baselines were compiled and executed using the same QAOA layer count, the same optimized variational parameters (obtained via classical simulation for each circuit size), and the same compiler settings and gate decomposition rules as the encoded circuits; the sole difference is the absence of the Iceberg encoding and detection gadgets. We will revise the Results section and the associated Methods paragraph to state this explicitly, thereby isolating the contribution of the error-detection co-optimization. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental hardware results are direct measurements

full rationale

The paper reports measured success probabilities and post-selection rates from runs on Quantinuum H2-1 hardware after tree-search co-optimization of QAOA circuits with newly designed Iceberg gadgets. These are empirical outcomes, not mathematical predictions or derivations that reduce to fitted inputs or self-definitions by construction. Prior Iceberg code references supply background but are not load-bearing for the reported hardware gains, which remain independently falsifiable via the physical experiment.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard quantum-circuit and trapped-ion noise assumptions plus the unproven claim that the tree-search procedure preserves fault tolerance; no new particles or forces are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Flexible fault-tolerant gadgets for the [[k+2,k,2]] Iceberg code can be designed such that co-optimization with an algorithmic circuit preserves error-detection capability.
    Invoked when the authors state that new gadgets were designed and then co-optimized while maintaining fault tolerance.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5881 in / 1384 out tokens · 40944 ms · 2026-05-22T17:38:34.333435+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Logical Compilation for Multi-Qubit Iceberg Patches

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    A new heuristic compiler for multi-qubit iceberg patches reduces circuit depth by 34 percent, cuts gate counts, and improves fidelity metrics on 71 benchmarks compared with naive mapping.

  2. Error detection without post-selection in adaptive quantum circuits

    quant-ph 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Error detection is integrated into adaptive quantum circuits for non-equilibrium phase transition simulations by mapping errors to resets, achieving post-selection-free logical simulations near break-even on current hardware.

  3. Co-Designing Error Mitigation and Error Detection for Logical Qubits

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Optimized QED intervals plus steady-state extraction enable PEC+QED to deliver 2-11x lower error than PEC alone on Iceberg codes for QAOA.

  4. Fault-Tolerant Error Detection Above Break-Even for Multi-Qubit Gates

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Fault-tolerant Iceberg code on trapped-ion hardware achieves beyond-break-even error detection for Toffoli and Bell circuits by filtering errors, yielding higher fidelity than unencoded versions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    [n. d.]. Quantinuum H2-1. https://www.quantinuum.com/. March. 02 - April. 11, 2025

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Evered, Alexandra A

    Dolev Bluvstein, Simon J. Evered, Alexandra A. Geim, Sophie H. Li, Hengyun Zhou, Tom Manovitz, Sepehr Ebadi, Madelyn Cain, Marcin Kalinowski, Dominik Hangleiter, J. Pablo Bonilla Ataides, Nishad Maskara, Iris Cong, Xun Gao, Pe- dro Sales Rodriguez, Thomas Karolyshyn, Giulia Semeghini, Michael J. Gullans, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D. Luki...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3 2023

  3. [3]

    Sami Boulebnane and Ashley Montanaro. 2024. Solving Boolean Satisfiability Problems With The Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. PRX Quan- tum 5 (Sep 2024), 030348. Issue 3. https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030348

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.030348 2024

  4. [4]

    Sergey Bravyi and Jeongwan Haah. 2012. Magic-state distillation with low overhead. Physical Review A 86, 5 (Nov. 2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva. 86.052329

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2012

  5. [5]

    Christopher Chamberland and Andrew W Cross. 2019. Fault-tolerant magic state preparation with flag qubits. Quantum 3 (2019), 143

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    The computational power of random quantum circuits in arbitrary geometries (2024)

    Matthew DeCross, Reza Haghshenas, Minzhao Liu, Enrico Rinaldi, Johnnie Gray, Yuri Alexeev, Charles H. Baldwin, John P. Bartolotta, Matthew Bohn, Eli Chertkov, Julia Cline, Jonhas Colina, Davide DelVento, Joan M. Dreiling, Cameron Foltz, John P. Gaebler, Thomas M. Gatterman, Christopher N. Gilbreth, Joshua Giles, Dan Gresh, Alex Hall, Aaron Hankin, Azure H...

    work page arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Ran Duan and Seth Pettie. 2014. Linear-Time Approximation for Maximum Weight Matching. J. ACM 61, 1, Article 1 (Jan. 2014), 23 pages. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/2529989

    work page doi:10.1145/2529989 2014

  8. [8]

    Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, and Sam Gutmann. 2014. A Quantum Approxi- mate Optimization Algorithm. arXiv:1411.4028 (2014)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  9. [9]

    Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann, and Leo Zhou. 2022. The Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm and the Sherrington-Kirkpatrick Model at Infinite Size. Quantum 6 (July 2022), 759. https://doi.org/10.22331/q- 2022-07-07-759

    work page doi:10.22331/q- 2022

  10. [10]

    Edward Farhi, Sam Gutmann, Daniel Ranard, and Benjamin Villalonga. 2025. Lower bounding the MaxCut of high girth 3-regular graphs using the QAOA. arXiv:2503.12789 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Dongxin Gao, Daojin Fan, Chen Zha, Jiahao Bei, Guoqing Cai, Jianbin Cai, Sirui Cao, Fusheng Chen, Jiang Chen, Kefu Chen, Xiawei Chen, Xiqing Chen, Zhe Chen, Zhiyuan Chen, Zihua Chen, Wenhao Chu, Hui Deng, Zhibin Deng, Pei Ding, Xun Ding, Zhuzhengqi Ding, Shuai Dong, Yupeng Dong, Bo Fan, Yuanhao Fu, Song Gao, Lei Ge, Ming Gong, Jiacheng Gui, Cheng Guo, Sha...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.134.090601 2025

  12. [13]

    Tom Ginsberg and Vyom Patel. 2025. Quantum Error Detection For Early Term Fault-Tolerant Quantum Algorithms. arXiv:2503.10790 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [14]

    Hayato Goto. 2024. High-performance fault-tolerant quan- tum computing with many-hypercube codes. Science Advances 10, 36 (2024), eadp6388. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adp6388 arXiv:https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.adp6388

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adp6388 2024

  14. [15]

    Daniel Gottesman. 1998. Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation. Phys. Rev. A 57 (Jan 1998), 127–137. Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.57.127

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.57.127 1998

  15. [16]

    Daniel Gottesman. 2002. An introduction to quantum error correction. In Pro- ceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics , Vol. 58. 221–236

    work page 2002

  16. [17]

    Johnnie Gray and Stefanos Kourtis. 2021. Hyper-optimized tensor network contraction. Quantum 5 (2021), 410

    work page 2021

  17. [18]

    Gupta, Neereja Sundaresan, Thomas Alexander, Christopher J

    Riddhi S. Gupta, Neereja Sundaresan, Thomas Alexander, Christopher J. Wood, Seth T. Merkel, Michael B. Healy, Marius Hillenbrand, Tomas Jochym-O’Connor, James R. Wootton, Theodore J. Yoder, Andrew W. Cross, Maika Takita, and Benjamin J. Brown. 2024. Encoding a magic state with beyond break-even fidelity. Nature 625, 7994 (Jan. 2024), 259–263. https://doi....

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06846- 2024

  18. [19]

    Aric Hagberg and Drew Conway. 2020. Networkx: Network analysis with python. URL: https://networkx. github. io (2020), 1–48

    work page 2020

  19. [20]

    Tianyi Hao, Zichang He, Ruslan Shaydulin, Jeffrey Larson, and Marco Pistoia

    work page

  20. [21]

    End-to-end protocol for high- quality QAOA parameters with few shots

    End-to-end protocol for high-quality QAOA parameters with few shots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00557 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [22]

    Zichang He, David Amaro, Ruslan Shaydulin, and Marco Pistoia. 2024. Per- formance of quantum approximate optimization with quantum error detection. arXiv:2409.12104 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  22. [23]

    Zichang He, Rudy Raymond, Ruslan Shaydulin, and Marco Pistoia. 2025. Non- Variational Quantum Random Access Optimization with Alternating Operator Ansatz. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.04277 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [24]

    Zichang He, Ruslan Shaydulin, Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Dylan Herman, Chang- hao Li, Yue Sun, and Marco Pistoia. 2023. Alignment between initial state and mixer improves QAOA performance for constrained optimization. npj Quantum Information 9, 1 (2023), 121

    work page 2023

  24. [25]

    Zichang He, Ruslan Shaydulin, Dylan Herman, Changhao Li, Shree Hari Suresh- babu, and Marco Pistoia. 2024. Parameter Setting Heuristics Make the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm Suitable for the Early Fault-Tolerant Era. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.09538 (2024). https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.09538

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [26]

    Tad Hogg. 2000. Quantum search heuristics. Physical Review A 61, 5 (April 2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.61.052311

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.61.052311 2000

  26. [27]

    Tad Hogg and Dmitriy Portnov. 2000. Quantum optimization.Information Sciences 128, 3–4 (Oct. 2000), 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-0255(00)00052-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0020-0255(00)00052-9 2000

  27. [28]

    Fei Hua, Yanhao Chen, Yuwei Jin, Chi Zhang, Ari Hayes, Youtao Zhang, and Eddy Z. Zhang. 2021. AutoBraid: A Framework for Enabling Efficient Sur- face Code Communication in Quantum Computing. In MICRO-54: 54th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (Virtual Event, Greece) (MICRO ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY,...

    work page doi:10.1145/3466752.3480072 2021

  28. [29]

    Yuwei Jin, Xiangyu Gao, Minghao Guo, Henry Chen, Fei Hua, Chi Zhang, and Eddy Z. Zhang. 2024. Optimizing Quantum Fourier Transformation (QFT) Kernels for Modern NISQ and FT Architectures. In SC24: International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis . 1–15. https: //doi.org/10.1109/SC41406.2024.00074

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1109/sc41406.2024.00074 2024

  29. [30]

    Yuwei Jin, Fei Hua, Yanhao Chen, Ari Hayes, Chi Zhang, and Eddy Z. Zhang

    work page

  30. [31]

    In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 4 (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (ASPLOS ’23)

    Exploiting the Regular Structure of Modern Quantum Architectures for Compiling and Optimizing Programs with Permutable Operators. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 4 (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (ASPLOS ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY,...

    work page doi:10.1145/3623278.3624751

  31. [32]

    Yuwei Jin, Zirui Li, Fei Hua, Tianyi Hao, Huiyang Zhou, Yipeng Huang, and Eddy Z. Zhang. 2024. Tetris: A Compilation Framework for VQA Applications in Quantum Computing. arXiv:2309.01905 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2309. 01905

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [33]

    Youngseok Kim, Andrew Eddins, Sajant Anand, Ken Xuan Wei, Ewout van den Berg, Sami Rosenblatt, Hasan Nayfeh, Yantao Wu, Michael Zaletel, Kristan Temme, and Abhinav Kandala. 2023. Evidence for the utility of quantum computing before fault tolerance. Nature 618, 7965 (June 2023), 500–505. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06096-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06096-3 2023

  33. [34]

    Lingling Lao and Dan E. Browne. 2021. 2QAN: A quantum compiler for 2- local qubit Hamiltonian simulation algorithms. arXiv:2108.02099 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.02099

    work page arXiv 2021

  34. [35]

    Gushu Li, Yufei Ding, and Yuan Xie. 2019. Tackling the Qubit Mapping Problem for NISQ-Era Quantum Devices. arXiv:1809.02573 [cs.ET] https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1809.02573 12 Iceberg Beyond the Tip: Co-Compilation of a Quantum Error Detection Code and a Quantum Algorithm , ,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [36]

    Gushu Li, Anbang Wu, Yunong Shi, Ali Javadi-Abhari, Yufei Ding, and Yuan Xie

    work page

  36. [37]

    arXiv:2109.03371 [quant-ph] https://arxiv

    Paulihedral: A Generalized Block-Wise Compiler Optimization Framework For Quantum Simulation Kernels. arXiv:2109.03371 [quant-ph] https://arxiv. org/abs/2109.03371

    work page arXiv

  37. [38]

    Ji Liu, Alvin Gonzales, Benchen Huang, Zain Hamid Saleem, and Paul Hov- land. 2025. QuCLEAR: Clifford Extraction and Absorption for Quantum Circuit Optimization. arXiv:2408.13316 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.13316

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [39]

    Jordan Berg, Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Florian J

    Minzhao Liu, Ruslan Shaydulin, Pradeep Niroula, Matthew DeCross, Shih-Han Hung, Wen Yu Kon, Enrique Cervero-Martín, Kaushik Chakraborty, Omar Amer, Scott Aaronson, Atithi Acharya, Yuri Alexeev, K. Jordan Berg, Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Florian J. Curchod, Joan M. Dreiling, Neal Erickson, Cameron Foltz, Michael Foss-Feig, David Hayes, Travis S. Humble, Niraj ...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-08737-1 2025

  39. [40]

    Ashley Montanaro and Leo Zhou. 2024. Quantum speedups in solving near- symmetric optimization problems by low-depth QAOA. arXiv:arXiv:2411.04979

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [41]

    Morvan, B

    A. Morvan, B. Villalonga, X. Mi, S. Mandrà, A. Bengtsson, P. V. Klimov, Z. Chen, S. Hong, C. Erickson, I. K. Drozdov, J. Chau, G. Laun, R. Movassagh, A. Asfaw, L. T. A. N. Brandão, R. Peralta, D. Abanin, R. Acharya, R. Allen, T. I. Andersen, K. Anderson, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, J. Atalaya, J. C. Bardin, A. Bilmes, G. Bortoli, A. Bourassa, J. Bovair...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07998-6 2024

  41. [42]

    S A Moses, C H Baldwin, M S Allman, R Ancona, L Ascarrunz, C Barnes, J Bartolotta, B Bjork, P Blanchard, M Bohn, J G Bohnet, N C Brown, N Q Burdick, W C Burton, S L Campbell, J P Campora, C Carron, J Chambers, J W Chan, Y H Chen, A Chernoguzov, E Chertkov, J Colina, J P Curtis, R Daniel, M DeCross, D Deen, C Delaney, J M Dreiling, C T Ertsgaard, J Esposit...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.041052 2023

  42. [43]

    Hirofumi Nishi, Yuki Takei, Taichi Kosugi, Shunsuke Mieda, Yutaka Natsume, Takeshi Aoyagi, and Yu-ichiro Matsushita. 2025. Encoded probabilistic imaginary- time evolution on a trapped-ion quantum computer for ground and excited states of spin qubits. Physical Review Applied 23, 3 (2025), 034016

    work page 2025

  43. [44]

    Perlin, Ruslan Shaydulin, and Marco Pistoia

    Sivaprasad Omanakuttan, Zichang He, Zhiwei Zhang, Tianyi Hao, Arman Babakhani, Sami Boulebnane, Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Dylan Herman, Joseph Sullivan, Michael A. Perlin, Ruslan Shaydulin, and Marco Pistoia. 2025. Threshold for Fault-tolerant Quantum Advantage with the Quantum Approximate Opti- mization Algorithm. arXiv:2504.01897 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [45]

    Demonstration of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates

    A. Paetznick, M. P. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. M. Bello-Rivas, J. P. Campora III, A. Chernoguzov, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, L. Grans-Samuelsson, D. Gresh, D. Hayes, N. Hewitt, C. Holliman, C. V. Horst, J. Johansen, D. Lucchetti, Y. Matsuoka, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, A. Paz, J. Pino, P. Siegfried,...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  45. [46]

    Elijah Pelofske, Andreas Bärtschi, Lukasz Cincio, John Golden, and Stephan Eidenbenz. 2024. Scaling whole-chip QAOA for higher-order ising spin glass models on heavy-hex graphs. npj Quantum Information 10, 1 (Nov. 2024). https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41534-024-00906-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-024-00906-w 2024

  46. [47]

    Elijah Pelofske, Andreas Bärtschi, and Stephan Eidenbenz. 2023. Quantum An- nealing vs. QAOA: 127 Qubit Higher-Order Ising Problems on NISQ Computers. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science . Springer Nature Switzerland, 240–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32041-5_13

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-32041-5_13 2023

  47. [48]

    Bibek Pokharel and Daniel A Lidar. 2024. Better-than-classical Grover search via quantum error detection and suppression. npj Quantum Information 10, 1 (2024), 23

    work page 2024

  48. [49]

    Reichardt, David Aasen, Rui Chao, Alex Chernoguzov, Wim van Dam, John P

    Ben W. Reichardt, David Aasen, Rui Chao, Alex Chernoguzov, Wim van Dam, John P. Gaebler, Dan Gresh, Dominic Lucchetti, Michael Mills, Steven A. Moses, Brian Neyenhuis, Adam Paetznick, Andres Paz, Peter E. Siegfried, Marcus P. da Silva, Krysta M. Svore, Zhenghan Wang, and Matt Zanner. 2024. Demonstration of quantum computation and error correction with a t...

    work page arXiv 2024

  49. [50]

    Ben W Reichardt, Adam Paetznick, David Aasen, Ivan Basov, Juan M Bello-Rivas, Parsa Bonderson, Rui Chao, Wim van Dam, Matthew B Hastings, Andres Paz, et al. 2024. Logical computation demonstrated with a neutral atom quantum processor. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.11822 (2024)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  50. [51]

    Dubey, Christian Ufrecht, Maniraman Periyasamy, Axel Plinge, Christopher Mutschler & Daniel D

    Sebastian Rietsch, Abhishek Y. Dubey, Christian Ufrecht, Maniraman Periyasamy, Axel Plinge, Christopher Mutschler, and Daniel D. Scherer. 2024. Unitary Syn- thesis of Clifford+T Circuits with Reinforcement Learning. In 2024 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) . IEEE, 824–835. https://doi.org/10.1109/qce60285.2024.00102

    work page doi:10.1109/qce60285.2024.00102 2024

  51. [52]

    Pedro Sales Rodriguez, John M. Robinson, Paul Niklas Jepsen, Zhiyang He, Casey Duckering, Chen Zhao, Kai-Hsin Wu, Joseph Campo, Kevin Bagnall, Minho Kwon, Thomas Karolyshyn, Phillip Weinberg, Madelyn Cain, Simon J. Evered, Alexandra A. Geim, Marcin Kalinowski, Sophie H. Li, Tom Manovitz, Jesse Amato- Grill, James I. Basham, Liane Bernstein, Boris Braverma...

    work page arXiv 2024

  52. [53]

    Self, Marcello Benedetti, and David Amaro

    Chris N. Self, Marcello Benedetti, and David Amaro. 2024. Protecting expressive circuits with a quantum error detection code. Nature Physics 20, 2 (Jan. 2024), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-023-02282-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-023-02282-2 2024

  53. [54]

    Shaydulin, C

    Ruslan Shaydulin, Changhao Li, Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Matthew DeCross, Dylan Herman, Niraj Kumar, Jeffrey Larson, Danylo Lykov, Pierre Minssen, Yue Sun, Yuri Alexeev, Joan M. Dreiling, John P. Gaebler, Thomas M. Gatter- man, Justin A. Gerber, Kevin Gilmore, Dan Gresh, Nathan Hewitt, Chandler V. Horst, Shaohan Hu, Jacob Johansen, Mitchell Matheny, Tanner M...

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adm6761 2024

  54. [55]

    Ruslan Shaydulin and Marco Pistoia. 2023. QAOA with 𝑁 · 𝑝 ≥ 200. In 2023 IEEE Int. Conf. Quantum Comput. Eng. IEEE, 1074–1077. https://doi.org/10.1109/ qce57702.2023.00121

    work page arXiv 2023

  55. [56]

    Ruslan Shaydulin and Marco Pistoia. 2023. QAOA with𝑁 ·𝑝 ≥ 200. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) . IEEE, 1074–1077. https://doi.org/10.1109/qce57702.2023.00121

    work page doi:10.1109/qce57702.2023.00121 2023

  56. [58]

    A. M. Steane. 1996. Simple quantum error-correcting codes. Phys. Rev. A 54 (Dec 1996), 4741–4751. Issue 6. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.54.4741

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.54.4741 1996

  57. [59]

    Shree Hari Sureshbabu, Dylan Herman, Ruslan Shaydulin, Joao Basso, Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Yue Sun, and Marco Pistoia. 2024. Parameter Setting in Quantum Approximate Optimization of Weighted Problems. Quantum 8 (Jan. 2024), 1231. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2024-01-18-1231

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-01-18-1231 2024

  58. [60]

    Bochen Tan and Jason Cong. 2020. Optimal layout synthesis for quantum com- puting. In Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD ’20). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3400302.3415620 13 , , Y. Jin et al

    work page doi:10.1145/3400302.3415620 2020

  59. [61]

    Lokhov, Sidhant Misra, and Carleton Coffrin

    Byron Tasseff, Tameem Albash, Zachary Morrell, Marc Vuffray, Andrey Y. Lokhov, Sidhant Misra, and Carleton Coffrin. 2024. On the emerging potential of quantum annealing hardware for combinatorial optimization. Journal of Heuristics 30, 5–6 (Aug. 2024), 325–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10732-024-09530-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s10732-024-09530-5 2024

  60. [62]

    Wim van Dam, Hongbin Liu, Guang Hao Low, Adam Paetznick, Andres Paz, Marcus Silva, Aarthi Sundaram, Krysta Svore, and Matthias Troyer. 2024. End-to- end quantum simulation of a chemical system. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.05835 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  61. [63]

    Minev, Abhinav Kandala, and Kristan Temme

    Ewout van den Berg, Zlatko K. Minev, Abhinav Kandala, and Kristan Temme

    work page

  62. [64]

    Nature Physics 19, 8 (May 2023), 1116–1121

    Probabilistic error cancellation with sparse Pauli–Lindblad models on noisy quantum processors. Nature Physics 19, 8 (May 2023), 1116–1121. https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41567-023-02042-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-023-02042-2 2023

  63. [65]

    Vivien Vandaele, Simon Martiel, and Timothée Goubault de Brugière. 2022. Phase polynomials synthesis algorithms for NISQ architectures and beyond. Quantum Science and Technology 7, 4 (Sept. 2022), 045027. https://doi.org/10.1088/2058- 9565/ac5a0e

    work page doi:10.1088/2058- 2022

  64. [66]

    Yang Wang, Selwyn Simsek, Thomas M Gatterman, Justin A Gerber, Kevin Gilmore, Dan Gresh, Nathan Hewitt, Chandler V Horst, Mitchell Matheny, Tanner Mengle, et al. 2024. Fault-tolerant one-bit addition with the smallest interesting color code. Science Advances 10, 29 (2024), eado9024

    work page 2024

  65. [67]

    Jonathan Wurtz and Danylo Lykov. 2021. Fixed-angle conjectures for the quantum approximate optimization algorithm on regular MaxCut graphs. Physical Review A 104, 5 (Nov. 2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.104.052419

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.104.052419 2021

  66. [68]

    Kentaro Yamamoto, Samuel Duffield, Yuta Kikuchi, and David Muñoz Ramo

    work page

  67. [69]

    Demonstrating Bayesian quantum phase estimation with quantum error detection. Phys. Rev. Res. 6 (Feb 2024), 013221. Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevResearch.6.013221

    work page 2024

  68. [70]

    Ed Younis, Koushik Sen, Katherine Yelick, and Costin Iancu. 2021. QFAST: Conflating Search and Numerical Optimization for Scalable Quantum Circuit Synthesis. arXiv:2103.07093 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.07093

    work page arXiv 2021

  69. [71]

    Aosai Zhang, Haipeng Xie, Yu Gao, Jia-Nan Yang, Zehang Bao, Zitian Zhu, Jiachen Chen, Ning Wang, Chuanyu Zhang, Jiarun Zhong, Shibo Xu, Ke Wang, Yaozu Wu, Feitong Jin, Xuhao Zhu, Yiren Zou, Ziqi Tan, Zhengyi Cui, Fanhao Shen, Tingting Li, Yihang Han, Yiyang He, Gongyu Liu, Jiayuan Shen, Han Wang, Yanzhe Wang, Hang Dong, Jinfeng Deng, Hekang Li, Zhen Wang,...

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [72]

    Hayes, Longfei Qiu, Yuwei Jin, Yanhao Chen, and Eddy Z

    Chi Zhang, Ari B. Hayes, Longfei Qiu, Yuwei Jin, Yanhao Chen, and Eddy Z. Zhang

    work page

  71. [73]

    Nightcore: efficient and scalable serverless computing for latency-sensitive, interactive microservices,

    Time-optimal Qubit mapping. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (Virtual, USA) (ASPLOS ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 360–374. https://doi.org/10.1145/3445814.3446706

    work page doi:10.1145/3445814.3446706

  72. [74]

    Alwin Zulehner, Alexandru Paler, and Robert Wille. 2018. Efficient mapping of quantum circuits to the IBM QX architectures. In 2018 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE) . 1135–1138. https://doi.org/10.23919/ DATE.2018.8342181 DISCLAIMER This paper was prepared for informational purposes by the Global Technology Applied Resear...

    work page arXiv 2018