REVIEW 2 cited by
Application-Oriented Performance Benchmarks for Quantum Computing
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
In this work we introduce an open source suite of quantum application-oriented performance benchmarks that is designed to measure the effectiveness of quantum computing hardware at executing quantum applications. These benchmarks probe a quantum computer's performance on various algorithms and small applications as the problem size is varied, by mapping out the fidelity of the results as a function of circuit width and depth using the framework of volumetric benchmarking. In addition to estimating the fidelity of results generated by quantum execution, the suite is designed to benchmark certain aspects of the execution pipeline in order to provide end-users with a practical measure of both the quality of and the time to solution. Our methodology is constructed to anticipate advances in quantum computing hardware that are likely to emerge in the next five years. This benchmarking suite is designed to be readily accessible to a broad audience of users and provides benchmarks that correspond to many well-known quantum computing algorithms.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Quantum Fidelity-per-Cost: A Metric for Evaluation of Quantum Computing Systems
Cost-aware ranking of cloud QPUs via QFC disagrees with fidelity-only ranking; billing model, not hardware, fixes how the score scales with shot count.
-
From Bits to Qubits: Challenges in Classical-Quantum Integration
A comparative benchmark of three quantum image encoding methods shows no single best technique, with FRQI using fewer qubits but much deeper circuits and lower finite-shot accuracy.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.