Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

PowerMove: Optimizing Compilation for Neutral Atom Quantum Computers with Zoned Architecture

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read PowerMove claims that jointly optimizing gate scheduling, qubit allocation, qubit movement, and the zoned architecture raises neutral-atom circuit fidelity by orders of magnitude while cutting execution and compilation time.

desk verdict PowerMove is a genuine new compiler idea for neutral-atom machines, but its collective-move feasibility criterion is unproven and the evaluation leans on the same unverified model. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12263 v1 pith:57472KJF submitted 2024-11-19 quant-ph

Jixuan Ruan , Xiang Fang , Hezi Zhang , Ang Li , Travis Humble , Yufei Ding This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords neutralatomquantumcomputingzonedarchitecturequbitmovementacousto-opticdeflectorcompilationgateschedulingfidelityoptimizationcircuitrouting
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

PowerMove is a compiler for neutral-atom quantum computers that treats the zoned architecture as a first-class optimization resource. Its central thesis is that the four decisions a neutral-atom compiler faces—when to fire parallel two-qubit gates, where to place qubits, how to move them, and when to shelter them in a storage zone—constrain one another and must be made jointly rather than in sequence. On the paper's benchmarks, the jointly optimized compilation raises circuit fidelity by several orders of magnitude over the previous leading compiler, with a 70-qubit Bernstein-Vazirani circuit improving from about $7\times 10^{-4}$ to $0.75$, and reduces execution time by 1.71x to 3.46x and compilation time by up to 213.5x. The reason to care is that fidelity, not qubit count, is the limiting resource in near-term neutral-atom computation; if these numbers hold, much larger algorithms become usable and the storage zone stops being a hardware curiosity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery has three pieces. First, a stage scheduler that partitions CZ gates by greedy edge coloring and reorders the stages so successive stages share as many interacting qubits as possible, with an asymmetry that favors sending qubits into storage over pulling them out. Second, a continuous router that formulates each qubit's next-stage destination as a target site coordinate, classifies qubits as static, mobile, or undecided by zone choice and clustering risk, then greedily groups the single-qubit moves into collective moves using a pairwise conflict test: two moves conflict if they reverse their relative x-order or y-order. Third, a Coll-Move scheduler that executes groups in descending order of move-ins minus move-outs and, with multiple AOD arrays, partitions groups across arrays to parallelize movement. Together these convert the compiler's problem from separate layout-to-layout transitions into one continuous layout-transition problem with storage-zone awareness.

What would settle it

Construct a small example on a grid where each pair of single-qubit moves preserves relative x/y order, but no single AOD frame can realize all moves because its rows and columns must move together and cannot cross. Simulating or implementing PowerMove's grouping on such a case would settle whether its collision-free criterion is physically sufficient; if such a case exists, the movement schedules and reported fidelity and execution-time gains would need to be recomputed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims to be the first neutral-atom compiler to integrate the storage zone while allowing direct transitions between computation layouts instead of returning to an initial layout after every Rydberg stage. Its continuous router assigns every qubit a target site for the next stage, including sites inside or outside the storage zone, and then groups the resulting single-qubit movements into collective moves that respect the constraint that rows and columns of a mobile trap array move in tandem and cannot cross. The stage scheduler orders CZ stages to minimize qubit interchange between the storage and computation zones, and the Coll-Move scheduler orders and parallelizes collective moves to maximize dwell time in storage. In evaluation, the with-storage configuration removes essentially all excitation error, improves fidelity versus the no-storage variant by 313.86x on average, and the full pipeline beats the previous best compiler in every reported benchmark.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that checking each pair of moves preserves left-right and top-bottom order is enough to guarantee that one mobile trap array, whose rows and columns must move together and cannot cross, can actually execute all the grouped movements in that layout transition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Near-term neutral-atom circuits previously limited by decoherence and excitation errors can run at useful fidelity; in the paper, a 70-qubit Bernstein-Vazirani circuit goes from $6.92\times10^{-4}$ to $0.75$ with storage.
  • Eliminating the return-to-home layout means fewer transfers and shorter movement paths, directly cutting execution time by 1.71x to 3.46x across benchmarks.
  • Storage-zone placement removes the Rydberg excitation error for non-interacting qubits, which grows with circuit size and becomes the dominant error for large programs.
  • Near-linear heuristics replace expensive maximum-independent-set solvers, cutting compilation time by up to 213.5x and making larger circuits compilable in practice.
  • Multiple independently controlled AOD arrays give a direct hardware tradeoff: more arrays shorten movement latency and reduce decoherence without changing transfer error.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension: the pairwise x/y-order conflict check is a necessary condition, but the paper does not show it is sufficient for an AOD frame whose rows and columns must move in tandem; a brute-force check on small grids would validate or falsify the grouping method.
  • The same continuous-routing idea could apply to other reconfigurable quantum platforms, such as trapped-ion shuttling, if the movement constraint is expressed as an order-preservation invariant.
  • The fidelity model treats storage-zone decoherence as negligible; re-running the evaluation with a finite storage-zone $T_2$ would show how much of the reported 313.86x with-storage gain depends on that hardware assumption.
  • The reported compilation-time scaling suggests the heuristics may reach thousands of qubits, but deeper circuits with more CZ layers would test whether greedy stage ordering degrades relative to global scheduling.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes PowerMove, a compiler for neutral-atom quantum computers with a zoned architecture. PowerMove jointly handles stage scheduling, qubit allocation, qubit movement, and storage-zone placement: a Stage Scheduler orders CZ stages to reduce inter-zone movement, a Continuous Router determines single-qubit moves for direct layout transitions, a Coll-Move grouping step packs these moves into collective AOD moves, and a Coll-Move Scheduler orders and parallelizes the resulting groups across multiple AOD arrays. The evaluation compares PowerMove with Enola and reports fidelity improvements of several orders of magnitude (for example, BV-70 rising from 6.92e-4 to 0.75), execution-time reductions of 1.71x to 3.46x, and compilation-time reductions up to 213.5x.

Significance. If the main claims are correct, this would be a valuable compiler contribution: it addresses an important and timely hardware feature (the zoned architecture), is evaluated against the strongest available baseline (Enola), and the improvements come from heuristics rather than from fitting parameters to the reported fidelity numbers, which is a strength. The ablation study and the multi-AOD analysis are also helpful. However, the central movement-grouping step is not shown to produce physically executable AOD schedules, and no code or simulator is provided to independently verify the schedules. The reported gains are therefore not yet supported as stated.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.3] The conflict test used for Coll-Move grouping checks only whether the relative x/y order of the two endpoints flips. This condition is necessary for non-crossing row/column motion in an AOD, but it is not sufficient: it does not verify that the moves in a group can be assigned to rows and columns of a single AOD array with fixed identities, and it does not model the SLM transfers required to load or unload atoms whose row or column is shared. As a result, a collision-free group may contain moves that are physically unrealizable (for example, two atoms that must separate from a common CZ site while still sharing a row/column, or moves that require two rows/columns to coincide). Because the Table 3 evaluation uses this same grouping routine with no independent physical check, the reported fidelity and execution-time improvements rest on an unverified feasibility assumption. The paper needs either a proof that every conflict-free group is realizable by one AOD array, a cycle-accurate AOD simulation that validates the schedules, or a corrected grouping algorithm that incorporates row/column identity and transfer constraints.
  2. [Section 6.2] The multi-AOD scheduler partitions the already-grouped Coll-Moves into parallel batches, but it never assigns qubits to specific AOD arrays or verifies that a qubit's movement can be partitioned across arrays without extra SLM-to-AOD transfers. The claim that the transfer error is unchanged because 'the number of transfers does not change' is not justified: distributing groups across multiple AODs may require additional transfers to move atoms between arrays, which would change N_trans in Eq. (1). Without a resource-aware allocation, the multi-AOD speedups shown in Figure 7 are not demonstrated.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 4.2] The stage-scheduling objective contains a free parameter alpha < 1, but the paper does not report a sensitivity analysis or justify the chosen value beyond the qualitative preference for move-in operations.
  2. [Table 3] In several rows the with-storage fidelity is lower than the non-storage fidelity (for example, QAOA-regular4-40: 0.42 vs 0.45, and VQE-30: 0.79 vs 0.81), which is not discussed in the text claiming that the storage zone 'significantly enhances fidelity.'
  3. [Section 7.2] The claimed average improvement of 313.86x for the storage zone is not defined; because the per-benchmark ratios span several orders of magnitude, please state whether this is a geometric or arithmetic mean and report the per-benchmark ratios.
  4. [Section 7.3 / Figure 7] The benchmarks are randomly generated, but the evaluation does not report variance across seeds or error bars; adding this would strengthen the comparison.
  5. [Abstract / Section 9] The paper states that code will be open-sourced later; for a compiler evaluation, making the artifact available at submission time would materially improve reproducibility.
  6. [Section 5.2, Step 3] The description 'search around its current location to find the nearest empty site' is underspecified; please give the search order, distance metric, and tie-breaking rule.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: PowerMove's schedule optimizations are evaluated against an external baseline using a hardware-fidelity model whose parameters are cited, not fitted.

full rationale

PowerMove is a compiler heuristic; its claimed contributions are measured by comparing generated schedules against the Enola baseline under a fixed fidelity model (Eq. 1). The fidelity model's parameters (1Q gate fidelity, CZ fidelity, excitation error, transfer error, T2, movement constraints) are taken from external hardware papers, not fitted to the evaluation results. The storage-zone benefit is introduced as an assumption from Bluvstein et al. [6] that coherence decay in storage is negligible and that stored qubits avoid Rydberg excitation; this is an input assumption, not a consequence of PowerMove's own outputs, so it does not make the fidelity 'predictions' circular. The Stage Scheduler, Continuous Router, and Coll-Move Scheduler are heuristics applied to benchmark circuits; none of them involves fitting a parameter to the target fidelity or execution-time numbers. The only self-citations (Refs. [50], [53], [54], [55]) appear in Related Work and concern other quantum platforms; they are not load-bearing for the NAQC compilation claims. The skeptical concern about the Sec. 5.3 pairwise conflict criterion is a physical-feasibility or soundness concern: the criterion may be insufficient for real AOD row/column constraints, but it is not obtained from the claimed results, so it is not a circularity. The paper's central derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to circularity: the compiler's schedules are inputs to an external fidelity model, not equivalent to the model's predictions by construction. Score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The main conditional inputs are the hardware fidelity parameters in Table 1, taken from prior experiments, plus the paper-specific alpha parameter and the unproved AOD grouping feasibility assumption.

free parameters (1)
  • alpha (stage-scheduling weight) = None given (stated alpha < 1)
    In Section 4.2 the cost between consecutive stages is |Qi \ Qi+1| + alpha |Qi+1 \ Qi| with alpha < 1. The value is chosen by hand and never reported, so the reported results are conditional on an unspecified constant.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Qubits inside the storage zone experience negligible decoherence and no Rydberg excitation error.
    Used in Section 2.2 fidelity model (Eq. 1) and throughout Section 6; if storage is not perfectly shielded, the storage-zone fidelity gains shrink.
  • domain assumption A site can hold either two interacting qubits or one non-interacting qubit.
    Section 5.1; this idealization underlies the clustering checks and the continuous router's placement decisions.
  • ad hoc to paper Preserving pairwise x/y order is sufficient for a set of 1Q moves to be executable as one AOD Coll-Move.
    Section 5.3 defines conflicts only as pairwise order changes, but never proves that a non-conflicting group can be realized by a single AOD frame whose rows and columns move in tandem; no physical simulation is provided.
  • domain assumption Gates within one stage act on disjoint qubits and can be executed in one Rydberg excitation.
    Standard stage model used in Section 4.1; inherited from prior compilers such as Enola.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PowerMove: Optimizing Compilation for Neutral Atom Quantum Computers with Zoned Architecture." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/57472KJF

@misc{pith2026241112263,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PowerMove: Optimizing Compilation for Neutral Atom Quantum Computers with Zoned Architecture},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/57472KJF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12263}
}
read the original abstract

Neutral atom-based quantum computers (NAQCs) have recently emerged as promising candidates for scalable quantum computing, largely due to their advanced hardware capabilities, particularly qubit movement and the zoned architecture (ZA). However, fully leveraging these features poses significant compiler challenges, as it requires addressing complexities across gate scheduling, qubit allocation, qubit movement, and inter-zone communication. In this paper, we present PowerMove, an efficient compiler for NAQCs that enhances the qubit movement framework while fully integrating the advantages of ZA. By recognizing and leveraging the interdependencies between these key aspects, PowerMove unlocks new optimization opportunities, significantly enhancing both scalability and fidelity. Our evaluation demonstrates an improvement in fidelity by several orders of magnitude compared to the state-of-the-art methods, with execution time improved by up to 3.46x and compilation time reduced by up to 213.5x. We will open-source our code later to foster further research and collaboration within the community.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12263 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Four key aspects of the NAQC compilation problem. (b) Overview of the PowerMove framework. The design of each component is based on the interplay of multiple aspects of the problem. (4) Zoned architecture (ZA). During layout transitions, non￾interacting qubits should be moved to the storage zone for protection, while interacting qubits must be brought out of storage for computation. Handling all of these aspects… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) NAQC with zoned architecture. (b) Qubit allo￾cation for CZ gates. (c) Movement constraints of AOD. Qubit Movement. Qubit movement is controlled by two types of optical traps [5]: (1) static traps generated by a spa￾tial light modulator (SLM) [18, 40], and (2) mobile traps gen￾erated by a crossed 2D acousto-optic deflector (AOD) [7], represented by blue and yellow (or green) dots in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a)-(d) Qubit clustering issue in Enola. (e)-(f) Chal￾lenges with Enola’s integration of the storage zone. errors, as shown in Fig.3(e). For each stage, interacting qubits would need to shuttle back and forth between the storage and computation zones to return to the initial layout. For instance, to execute the two stages shown in Fig.3(a)(d), Enola would need to move the qubits as depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of four qubit movement scenarios: (a) Two qubits in the computation zone move to the storage zone in the next stage as they do not interact with other qubits. (b) Two qubits in the storage zone move to the computation zone for a CZ interaction. (c) We cons…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Movement conflicts on x-coordinate. 5.3 Collective Movement Grouping Since the movement constraints within an AOD (Sec. 2.1) may not allow all the 1Q movements to be conducted simul￾taneously, we group them into collective moves (Coll-Moves) with two optimization goals…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Effects of the continuous router and the introduction of zoned architecture on QAOA-regular3, QSIM-rand-0.3, QFT, VQE, and BV benchmark circuits. This study evaluates various numbers of qubits and focuses on four key components of overall circuit fidelity. and assess t…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Effects of multiple AODs on the 100-qubit QAOA￾regular3, 20-qubit QSIM-rand-0.3, 18-qubit QFT, 50-qubit VQE, and 70-qubit BV benchmark circuits. Neutral atom compiler. The development of compilers for NAQC has evolved in response to its continuously ad￾vancing hardware…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Quantum circuits as a game: A reinforcement learning agent for quantum compilation and its application to reconfigurable neutral atom arrays

    quant-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A transformer-based reinforcement learning agent learns to reconfigure atoms in neutral atom arrays and reduces estimated logarithmic infidelity by up to about 20% on benchmark circuits, including unseen ones.

  2. Quantum Compiler Design for Qubit Mapping and Routing: A Cross-Architectural Survey of Superconducting, Trapped-Ion, and Neutral Atom Systems

    quant-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A cross-architectural survey that categorizes qubit mapping and routing compilers for superconducting, trapped-ion, and neutral atom quantum hardware.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor

    Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Joseph C Bardin, Rami Barends, Rupak Biswas, Sergio Boixo, Fernando GSL Brandao, David A Buell, et al. Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor. Nature, 574(7779):505–510, 2019

    2019

  2. [2]

    Exploiting long- distance interactions and tolerating atom loss in neutral atom quantum architectures

    Jonathan M Baker, Andrew Litteken, Casey Duckering, Henry Hoff- mann, Hannes Bernien, and Frederic T Chong. Exploiting long- distance interactions and tolerating atom loss in neutral atom quantum architectures. In 2021 ACM/IEEE 48th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA), pages 818–831. IEEE, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Assembly and coherent control of a register of nuclear spin qubits

    Katrina Barnes, Peter Battaglino, Benjamin J Bloom, Kayleigh Cassella, Robin Coxe, Nicole Crisosto, Jonathan P King, Stanimir S Kondov, Krish Kotru, Stuart C Larsen, et al. Assembly and coherent control of a register of nuclear spin qubits. Nature Communications, 13(1):2779, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Fusion-based quantum computa- tion

    Sara Bartolucci, Patrick Birchall, Hector Bombin, Hugo Cable, Chris Dawson, Mercedes Gimeno-Segovia, Eric Johnston, Konrad Kieling, Naomi Nickerson, Mihir Pant, et al. Fusion-based quantum computa- tion. Nature Communications, 14(1):912, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Two- dimensional transport and transfer of a single atomic qubit in optical tweezers

    Jérôme Beugnon, Charles Tuchendler, Harold Marion, Alpha Gaë- tan, Yevhen Miroshnychenko, Yvan RP Sortais, Andrew M Lance, Matthew PA Jones, Gaetan Messin, Antoine Browaeys, et al. Two- dimensional transport and transfer of a single atomic qubit in optical tweezers. Nature Physics, 3(10):696–699, 2007

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays

    Dolev Bluvstein, Simon J Evered, Alexandra A Geim, Sophie H Li, Hengyun Zhou, Tom Manovitz, Sepehr Ebadi, Madelyn Cain, Marcin Kalinowski, Dominik Hangleiter, et al. Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays. Nature, 626(7997):58–65, 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays

    Dolev Bluvstein, Harry Levine, Giulia Semeghini, Tout T Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Marcin Kalinowski, Alexander Keesling, Nishad Maskara, Hannes Pichler, Markus Greiner, et al. A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays. Nature, 604(7906):451– 456, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Compilation for dynamically field-programmable qubit arrays with efficient and provably near-optimal scheduling

    Daniel Bochen Tan, Wan-Hsuan Lin, and Jason Cong. Compilation for dynamically field-programmable qubit arrays with efficient and provably near-optimal scheduling. arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2405, 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Inter- leaving: Modular architectures for fault-tolerant photonic quantum computing

    Hector Bombin, Isaac H Kim, Daniel Litinski, Naomi Nickerson, Mihir Pant, Fernando Pastawski, Sam Roberts, and Terry Rudolph. Inter- leaving: Modular architectures for fault-tolerant photonic quantum computing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.08612, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Blueprint for a scalable photonic fault-tolerant quantum computer

    J Eli Bourassa, Rafael N Alexander, Michael Vasmer, Ashlesha Patil, Ilan Tzitrin, Takaya Matsuura, Daiqin Su, Ben Q Baragiola, Saikat Guha, Guillaume Dauphinais, et al. Blueprint for a scalable photonic fault-tolerant quantum computer. Quantum, 5:392, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    On universal and fault-tolerant quantum computing

    P Oscar Boykin, Tal Mor, Matthew Pulver, Vwani Roychowdhury, and Farrokh Vatan. On universal and fault-tolerant quantum computing. arXiv preprint quant-ph/9906054, 1999

    1999 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Optimal mapping for near-term quantum architectures based on rydberg atoms

    Sebastian Brandhofer, Ilia Polian, and Hans Peter Büchler. Optimal mapping for near-term quantum architectures based on rydberg atoms. In 2021 IEEE/ACM International Conference On Computer Aided Design (ICCAD), pages 1–7. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    The future of quantum computing with superconducting qubits

    Sergey Bravyi, Oliver Dial, Jay M Gambetta, Darío Gil, and Zaira Nazario. The future of quantum computing with superconducting qubits. Journal of Applied Physics, 132(16), 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges

    Colin D Bruzewicz, John Chiaverini, Robert McConnell, and Jeremy M Sage. Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges. Applied Physics Reviews, 6(2), 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Benchmarking a trapped-ion quantum computer with 29 algorithmic qubits

    Jwo-Sy Chen, Erik Nielsen, Matthew Ebert, Volkan Inlek, Kenneth Wright, Vandiver Chaplin, Andrii Maksymov, Eduardo Páez, Amrit Poudel, Peter Maunz, et al. Benchmarking a trapped-ion quantum computer with 29 algorithmic qubits. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.05071, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    On the qubit routing problem

    Alexander Cowtan, Silas Dilkes, Ross Duncan, Alexandre Krajenbrink, Will Simmons, and Seyon Sivarajah. On the qubit routing problem. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.08091, 2019

    1902 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Quantum optimization of maximum indepen- dent set using rydberg atom arrays

    Sepehr Ebadi, Alexander Keesling, Madelyn Cain, Tout T Wang, Harry Levine, Dolev Bluvstein, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Omran, J-G Liu, Rhine Samajdar, et al. Quantum optimization of maximum indepen- dent set using rydberg atom arrays. Science, 376(6598):1209–1215, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator

    Sepehr Ebadi, Tout T Wang, Harry Levine, Alexander Keesling, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Omran, Dolev Bluvstein, Rhine Samajdar, Hannes Pichler, Wen Wei Ho, et al. Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator. Nature, 595(7866):227–232, 2021

    2021

  11. [19]

    High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral atom quantum computer

    Simon J Evered, Dolev Bluvstein, Marcin Kalinowski, Sepehr Ebadi, Tom Manovitz, Hengyun Zhou, Sophie H Li, Alexandra A Geim, Tout T Wang, Nishad Maskara, et al. High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral atom quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.05420, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    High-fidelity entangle- ment of neutral atoms via a rydberg-mediated single-modulated-pulse controlled-phase gate

    Zhuo Fu, Peng Xu, Yuan Sun, Yang-Yang Liu, Xiao-Dong He, Xiao Li, Min Liu, Run-Bing Li, Jin Wang, Liang Liu, et al. High-fidelity entangle- ment of neutral atoms via a rydberg-mediated single-modulated-pulse controlled-phase gate. Physical Review A, 105(4):042430, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Multi-qubit entangle- ment and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer

    TM Graham, Y Song, J Scott, C Poole, L Phuttitarn, K Jooya, P Eich- ler, X Jiang, A Marra, B Grinkemeyer, et al. Multi-qubit entangle- ment and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer. Nature, 604(7906):457–462, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Signal processing techniques for efficient compilation of con- trolled rotations in trapped ions

    Koen Groenland, Freek Witteveen, Kareljan Schoutens, and Rene Ger- ritsma. Signal processing techniques for efficient compilation of con- trolled rotations in trapped ions. New Journal of Physics , 22(6):063006, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Super- conducting quantum computing: a review

    He-Liang Huang, Dachao Wu, Daojin Fan, and Xiaobo Zhu. Super- conducting quantum computing: a review. Science China Information Sciences, 63:1–32, 2020

    2020

  16. [24]

    Fast quantum gates for neutral atoms

    Dieter Jaksch, Juan Ignacio Cirac, Peter Zoller, Steve L Rolston, Robin Côté, and Mikhail D Lukin. Fast quantum gates for neutral atoms. Physical Review Letters, 85(10):2208, 2000. 12

    2000

  17. [25]

    Theory of quantum error- correcting codes

    Emanuel Knill and Raymond Laflamme. Theory of quantum error- correcting codes. Physical Review A, 55(2):900, 1997

    1997

  18. [26]

    Linear optical quan- tum computing with photonic qubits

    Pieter Kok, William J Munro, Kae Nemoto, Timothy C Ralph, Jonathan P Dowling, and Gerard J Milburn. Linear optical quan- tum computing with photonic qubits. Reviews of modern physics , 79(1):135–174, 2007

    2007

  19. [27]

    Dispersive optical systems for scalable raman driving of hyperfine qubits

    Harry Levine, Dolev Bluvstein, Alexander Keesling, Tout T Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Omran, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D Lukin. Dispersive optical systems for scalable raman driving of hyperfine qubits. Physical Review A , 105(3):032618, 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    Parallel implementation of high- fidelity multiqubit gates with neutral atoms

    Harry Levine, Alexander Keesling, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Om- ran, Tout T Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Hannes Bernien, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, Hannes Pichler, et al. Parallel implementation of high- fidelity multiqubit gates with neutral atoms. Physical review letters, 123(17):...

    2019

  21. [29]

    Tackling the qubit mapping prob- lem for nisq-era quantum devices

    Gushu Li, Yufei Ding, and Yuan Xie. Tackling the qubit mapping prob- lem for nisq-era quantum devices. In Proceedings of the twenty-fourth international conference on architectural support for programming lan- guages and operating systems , pages 1001–1014, 2019

    2019

  22. [30]

    Timing-aware qubit mapping and gate scheduling adapted to neutral atom quantum computing

    Yongshang Li, Yu Zhang, Mingyu Chen, Xiangyang Li, and Peng Xu. Timing-aware qubit mapping and gate scheduling adapted to neutral atom quantum computing. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems , 42(11):3768–3780, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    A tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits

    Hannah J Manetsch, Gyohei Nomura, Elie Bataille, Kon H Leung, Xudong Lv, and Manuel Endres. A tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12021, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Basic circuit compilation techniques for an ion-trap quantum machine

    Dmitri Maslov. Basic circuit compilation techniques for an ion-trap quantum machine. New Journal of Physics , 19(2):023035, 2017

    2017

  25. [33]

    Decomposing and routing quantum circuits under constraints for neutral atom architectures

    Natalia Nottingham, Michael A Perlin, Ryan White, Hannes Bernien, Frederic T Chong, and Jonathan M Baker. Decomposing and routing quantum circuits under constraints for neutral atom architectures. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14996, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Cirq: A python framework for creating, editing, and invoking quantum circuits

    Victory Omole, Akhilesh Tyagi, Calista Carey, AJ Hanus, Andrew Han- cock, Austin Garcia, and Jake Shedenhelm. Cirq: A python framework for creating, editing, and invoking quantum circuits

  27. [35]

    Geyser: a compilation framework for quantum computing with neutral atoms

    Tirthak Patel, Daniel Silver, and Devesh Tiwari. Geyser: a compilation framework for quantum computing with neutral atoms. InProceedings of the 49th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture , pages 383–395, 2022

    2022

  28. [36]

    Demonstration of the trapped-ion quantum ccd computer architecture

    Juan M Pino, Jennifer M Dreiling, Caroline Figgatt, John P Gaebler, Steven A Moses, MS Allman, CH Baldwin, Michael Foss-Feig, David Hayes, Karl Mayer, et al. Demonstration of the trapped-ion quantum ccd computer architecture. Nature, 592(7853):209–213, 2021

    2021

  29. [37]

    Qiskit: An open-source framework for quantum computing, 2023

    Qiskit contributors. Qiskit: An open-source framework for quantum computing, 2023

    2023

  30. [38]

    Muzzle the shuttle: efficient compilation for multi-trap trapped-ion quantum computers

    Abdullah Ash Saki, Rasit Onur Topaloglu, and Swaroop Ghosh. Muzzle the shuttle: efficient compilation for multi-trap trapped-ion quantum computers. In 2022 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition (DATE), pages 322–327. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  31. [39]

    Computational capabilities and compiler development for neutral atom quantum pro- cessors—connecting tool developers and hardware experts

    Ludwig Schmid, David F Locher, Manuel Rispler, Sebastian Blatt, Jo- hannes Zeiher, Markus Müller, and Robert Wille. Computational capabilities and compiler development for neutral atom quantum pro- cessors—connecting tool developers and hardware experts. Quantum Science and Te...

    2024

  32. [40]

    Quantum simula- tion of 2d antiferromagnets with hundreds of rydberg atoms

    Pascal Scholl, Michael Schuler, Hannah J Williams, Alexander A Eber- harter, Daniel Barredo, Kai-Niklas Schymik, Vincent Lienhard, Louis- Paul Henry, Thomas C Lang, Thierry Lahaye, et al. Quantum simula- tion of 2d antiferromagnets with hundreds of rydberg atoms. Nature, 595(7...

    2021

  33. [41]

    Tket: a retargetable compiler for nisq devices

    Seyon Sivarajah, Silas Dilkes, Alexander Cowtan, Will Simmons, Alec Edgington, and Ross Duncan. Tket: a retargetable compiler for nisq devices. Quantum Science and Technology, 2020

    2020

  34. [42]

    Qubit mapping for reconfigurable atom arrays

    Bochen Tan, Dolev Bluvstein, Mikhail D Lukin, and Jason Cong. Qubit mapping for reconfigurable atom arrays. In Proceedings of the 41st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design , pages 1–9, 2022

    2022

  35. [43]

    Optimal layout synthesis for quantum computing

    Bochen Tan and Jason Cong. Optimal layout synthesis for quantum computing. In Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, pages 1–9, 2020

    2020

  36. [44]

    Compiling quantum circuits for dynamically field-programmable neu- tral atoms array processors

    Daniel Bochen Tan, Dolev Bluvstein, Mikhail D Lukin, and Jason Cong. Compiling quantum circuits for dynamically field-programmable neu- tral atoms array processors. Quantum, 8:1281, 2024

    2024

  37. [45]

    Observation of rydberg blockade be- tween two atoms

    E Urban, Todd A Johnson, T Henage, L Isenhower, DD Yavuz, TG Walker, and M Saffman. Observation of rydberg blockade be- tween two atoms. Nature Physics, 5(2):110–114, 2009

    2009

  38. [46]

    Atomique: A quantum compiler for reconfigurable neutral atom arrays

    Hanrui Wang, Pengyu Liu, Daniel Bochen Tan, Yilian Liu, Jiaqi Gu, David Z Pan, Jason Cong, Umut A Acar, and Song Han. Atomique: A quantum compiler for reconfigurable neutral atom arrays. In 2024 ACM/IEEE 51st Annual International Symposium on Computer Archi- tecture (ISCA), pa...

    2024

  39. [47]

    Q-pilot: field programmable quantum array compilation with flying ancillas

    Hanrui Wang, Bochen Tan, Pengyu Liu, Yilian Liu, Jiaqi Gu, Jason Cong, and Song Han. Q-pilot: field programmable quantum array compilation with flying ancillas. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16190, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Multidimensional quantum entangle- ment with large-scale integrated optics

    Jianwei Wang, Stefano Paesani, Yunhong Ding, Raffaele Santagati, Paul Skrzypczyk, Alexia Salavrakos, Jordi Tura, Remigiusz Augusiak, Laura Mančinska, Davide Bacco, et al. Multidimensional quantum entangle- ment with large-scale integrated optics. Science, 360(6386):285–291, 2018

    2018

  41. [49]

    Mqt qmap: Efficient quantum circuit mapping

    Robert Wille and Lukas Burgholzer. Mqt qmap: Efficient quantum circuit mapping. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Symposium on Physical Design, pages 198–204, 2023

    2023

  42. [50]

    Autocomm: A framework for enabling efficient commu- nication in distributed quantum programs

    Anbang Wu, Hezi Zhang, Gushu Li, Alireza Shabani, Yuan Xie, and Yufei Ding. Autocomm: A framework for enabling efficient commu- nication in distributed quantum programs. In 2022 55th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) , pages 1027–

    2022

  43. [51]

    Aquila: Quera’s 256-qubit neutral-atom quantum computer

    Jonathan Wurtz, Alexei Bylinskii, Boris Braverman, Jesse Amato-Grill, Sergio H Cantu, Florian Huber, Alexander Lukin, Fangli Liu, Phillip Weinberg, John Long, et al. Aquila: Quera’s 256-qubit neutral-atom quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.11727, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Half-minute-scale atomic coherence and high relative sta- bility in a tweezer clock

    Aaron W Young, William J Eckner, William R Milner, Dhruv Kedar, Matthew A Norcia, Eric Oelker, Nathan Schine, Jun Ye, and Adam M Kaufman. Half-minute-scale atomic coherence and high relative sta- bility in a tweezer clock. Nature, 588(7838):408–413, 2020

    2020

  45. [53]

    Oneperc: A randomness-aware compiler for photonic quantum computing

    Hezi Zhang, Jixuan Ruan, Hassan Shapourian, Ramana Rao Kompella, and Yufei Ding. Oneperc: A randomness-aware compiler for photonic quantum computing. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating System...

    2024

  46. [54]

    Oneq: A compilation framework for photonic one-way quantum computation

    Hezi Zhang, Anbang Wu, Yuke Wang, Gushu Li, Hassan Shapourian, Alireza Shabani, and Yufei Ding. Oneq: A compilation framework for photonic one-way quantum computation. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture , pages 1–14, 2023

    2023

  47. [55]

    Mech: Multi-entry communication highway for superconducting quantum chiplets

    Hezi Zhang, Keyi Yin, Anbang Wu, Hassan Shapourian, Alireza Sha- bani, and Yufei Ding. Mech: Multi-entry communication highway for superconducting quantum chiplets. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and O...

    2024

  48. [56]

    An efficient methodology for mapping quantum circuits to the ibm qx architectures

    Alwin Zulehner, Alexandru Paler, and Robert Wille. An efficient methodology for mapping quantum circuits to the ibm qx architectures. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 38(7):1226–1236, 2018. 13

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.