Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 211 references

Progress in the development of quantum algorithms and software

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A multi-year quantum computing roadmap produced a complete software stack and ran real algorithms on physical processors through a single cloud platform.

desk verdict Useful roadmap review of a national QC software program; headline cloud-execution claim is asserted without verifiable evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.04285 v1 pith:7X2OFTW6 submitted 2025-05-07 quant-ph

Anastasiia S. Nikolaeva , Daria O. Konina , Anatolii V. Antipov , Maksim A. Gavreev , Konstantin M. Makushin , Boris I. Bantysh , Andrey Yu. Chernyavskiy , Grigory V. Astretsov
show 5 more authors
Evgeniy A. Polyakov Aidar I. Saifoulline Evgeniy O. Kiktenko Alexey N. Rubtsov Aleksey K. Fedorov
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords quantumalgorithmscloudcomputingQAOAfixed-angleconjecturequditsemulatorserrorcorrectionbenchmarking
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

This review synthesizes the software half of a large national quantum-computing effort from 2020 to 2024 and argues that the pieces now form a functioning vertical stack: quantum algorithms, circuit compilers and qudit decompositions, error-suppression and correction methods, processor emulators, benchmarking tools, and a cloud platform that exposes algorithms and hardware to users. The headline result is that real quantum algorithms—including Grover search, Bernstein-Vazirani, variational quantum eigensolver runs, QAOA-based optimization, and machine-learning classification—were executed on physical processors through that cloud platform. The review also reports that the cloud platform connects more distinct hardware platforms (trapped ions, neutral atoms, superconducting circuits, photonics) than most comparable services. If the claims hold, they show that a coordinated software program can make heterogeneous quantum processors usable as a single remote computing resource, not just as laboratory demonstrations.

What carries the argument

The integrating object is the cloud-based quantum computing platform, which wraps emulators, compilers, benchmarking, and physical processors behind a common interface and is the reason algorithms can be called 'executed' rather than simulated. The main algorithmic workhorse is QAOA with fixed parameters (fpQAOA): universal angles are precomputed once on a training sample of problem instances, then reused without classical optimization, which is what makes the linear-system, differential-equation, and factoring-related algorithms practical on noisy hardware. A second mechanism is qudit compilation, which uses the extra levels of $d$-level systems as ancillas or embedded qubits to cut the number of noisy two-body gates in Toffoli decompositions from $O(N^2)$ to $2N-3$.

What would settle it

Take a problem class the review does not cover, such as Max-Cut on graphs with unbounded degree or an ill-conditioned linear system, fix the angles by the same training procedure, then measure the success probability on unseen instances against random-angle baselines; a failure to beat random angles would falsify the fixed-angle transfer assumption that underlies the QAOA speedups.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated in the paper's own terms, is that the roadmap delivered a complete, tested software ecosystem rather than isolated tools. The authors treat the execution of quantum algorithms through the cloud-based quantum computing platform as the key achievement: algorithms developed in-house were run on a trapped-ion processor, a neutral-atom processor, and in test mode on additional trapped-ion, superconducting, and photonic processors, with emulators filling in where hardware was not available. Supporting results include the demonstration that fixed-angle QAOA variants solve linear systems, differential equations, and factoring-related optimization without per-instance parameter optimization; variational algorithms reaching chemical accuracy on small molecules; qudit-based compilations that reduce multi-qubit gates to $2N-3$ entangling operations; and a single-ancilla error-correction scheme that improves stored-state fidelity under simulated noise.

Load-bearing premise

The reported speedups of the fpQAOA-based algorithms stand on the empirical assumption that a single fixed set of angles found on training instances works nearly as well on any unseen instance of the same problem class; the review offers no proof or broad failure analysis for this transfer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the fixed-angle transfer hypothesis holds broadly, QAOA-family algorithms can be deployed with essentially no quantum-classical optimization loop, removing a main practical bottleneck of variational approaches.
  • Qudit compilation lowers the gate count of multi-qubit primitives enough that algorithms like Grover and generalized Toffoli become usable on current noisy hardware; the review reports higher accuracy for the qutrit realization on a trapped-ion processor.
  • The single-ancilla error-correction scheme lets repetition-code experiments run on devices that lack many qubits, and simulations show fidelity gains for both Markovian and non-Markovian noise models.
  • Emulators calibrated against real processors reproduce device output with high fidelity once noise parameters are tuned, so they can stand in for hardware during algorithm development.
  • A single cloud interface can support at least a thousand experimental runs per year across multiple hardware types, making cross-platform algorithm comparison routine.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the fixed-angle approach, if it generalizes beyond the tested classes, would turn QAOA into a 'compile-once, run-many' pattern, but the current evidence is empirical and the review does not characterize when transfer fails.
  • Editorial inference: the qudit Toffoli decomposition's claimed $2N-3$ entangling gates suggests that mapping qubit circuits onto qudit processors could become a standard compilation step on any platform with accessible higher levels.
  • Editorial inference: the cloud platform's multi-architecture access makes direct hardware benchmarking feasible; a natural next test is submitting identical benchmarking circuits through the same interface to each connected processor and publishing the resulting fidelity and quantum-volume measurements.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a review of a software stack developed under the Russian Quantum Center / Rosatom quantum-computing roadmap (2020–2024). It surveys quantum algorithms (QAOA variants for linear systems, differential equations, and factoring; quantum chemistry algorithms; Hamiltonian simulation and signal-processing approaches), monitoring and benchmarking tools, compilation and optimization methods including qudit implementations, error suppression and correction, quantum processor emulators, and a cloud platform for quantum computing. The abstract and Section VII identify as the headline result the execution of quantum algorithms on real ion, neutral-atom, superconducting, and photonic processors through the developed cloud platform. The body is written in Russian apart from the English abstract, and the paper includes appendices listing implemented algorithms, error-correction methods, and emulators.

Significance. If its central claims are substantiated, the paper documents a functioning multi-hardware quantum software ecosystem with cloud access, which would be of interest to the quantum computing community as a national-roadmap case study. The manuscript has useful strengths: it provides a concrete catalog of algorithms and emulators, gives algorithmic details for the emulators (e.g., the Clifford-Clifford boson sampling procedure in Section VI.C), and presents runtime comparisons with Qiskit, Strawberry Fields, and Perceval. However, the headline cloud-execution claim is currently supported only by assertions and schematic figures, not by verifiable execution data, and several technical performance claims are presented without proof or with circular validation. The significance of the review is therefore conditional on the evidence being supplied.

major comments (4)
  1. [§VII, §VII.A] The central claim that quantum algorithms were executed on real processors via the cloud platform is not supported by verifiable evidence. The text states that at least 1000 experimental launches per year have been performed since 2021 and lists ion, neutral-atom, superconducting, and photonic processors, but no execution logs, job counts, dates, or output data are given. The cited references [38,39,55,120,156] describe runs on trapped-ion and other hardware, yet none of the in-text descriptions indicate that those runs were submitted through the described cloud platform as distinct from direct hardware laboratorial control. The authors should either provide verifiable platform artifacts (e.g., anonymized job records or a public endpoint) or explicitly reformulate the claim to what the cited references actually support.
  2. [§II.A (linear-systems algorithm)] The claimed guaranteed residual bound for the fpQAOA-based linear-systems solver is stated without proof. After the QUBO formulation in Eq. (4), the text asserts that the algorithm produces an answer with residual not exceeding t√n 2^{1−k}, where t is an unspecified norm bound, n is the dimension, and k is the number of bits, but no derivation or reference to a derivation is provided. Since this is presented as a formal guarantee for a key algorithm, the paper must either supply the proof or clearly state where it appears.
  3. [§VI.D, Tables V–VIII] The emulator-to-device validation is circular because the noise parameters were fitted to maximize the fidelity between emulator and device outputs. Agreement on the same data used for fitting cannot be reported as evidence that the emulator adequately reflects the physical device. This is especially problematic in Table VIII, where the noisy boson-sampling emulator gives fidelities of 46.54% and 28.05% for 2 and 3 input photons, substantially worse than the ideal emulator values; this contradicts the narrative that the fitted noisy model captures the device. The authors should report error bars, use a held-out set of circuits, and discuss the Table VIII discrepancy explicitly.
  4. [§II.A (fpQAOA fixed-angles hypothesis)] The fixed-angles hypothesis for QAOA is load-bearing for the claimed efficiency of the linear-systems, differential-equation, and factoring algorithms, but the paper provides no quantitative cross-validation protocol or generalization analysis for the universal angles. The statement that the hypothesis was 'confirmed' for the verification classes is not accompanied by the size of the training set, the number of test instances, or statistical significance measures. Either provide this evidence or explicitly label the transferability assumption as an open empirical conjecture on which the reported speedups depend.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Language] The body of the paper is written in Russian while the abstract is in English; if the target venue is an international journal, a full English version is required.
  2. [§II.A] There is a typo in the Russian text: 'ползволяет' should be 'позволяет'; also the residual bound 't√n21−k' is typeset in a way that makes the exponent of 2 unclear.
  3. [§IV] The text contains typos such as 'кторая' and 'соответвуют'; these should be corrected throughout.
  4. [Tables V–VIII] The fidelity values in Tables V–VIII are reported without error bars or the number of experimental shots, which makes it difficult to assess whether differences between emulator and device are statistically meaningful.
  5. [References] The reference list mixes published papers and arXiv preprints without consistently noting the published versions; please standardize the citation format.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

One emulator validation reduces to a fit; the central cloud-execution claim is asserted rather than derived, but that is missing support, not circularity.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section VI D (Сравнение с реальными квантовыми процессорами), Tables V-VIII]
    "Параметры шума для эмуляторов подбирались таким образом, чтобы максимизировать точность."

    The noisy-emulator fidelities in Tables V-VIII are computed on the same comparison whose noise parameters were chosen to maximize F(p,q). The table entries are the optimized objective itself, not an out-of-sample prediction: a high value only shows that the chosen noise model can be fitted to that device. The surrounding text uses these values as evidence that the emulators 'adequately reflect' real-device nonidealities, so that adequacy claim reduces to the fitting procedure.

full rationale

The paper is primarily a roadmap review, and most of its claims are programmatic descriptions of work done under the Rosatom roadmap. The only place where a presented quantitative result is forced by its own construction is the emulator comparison: noise parameters are explicitly tuned to maximize the reported fidelity, so the noisy-emulator columns are in-sample fits rather than validations. The fpQAOA fixed-angle results rest on an empirical conjecture and are not shown to use a disjoint evaluation set, but the text refers to test and verification classes, and no equation makes the evaluation coincide with the training objective, so I do not count this as demonstrated circularity. The headline cloud-execution claim (at least 1000 launches per year since 2021, executed through the platform) is asserted without execution logs or job artifacts; this is a serious missing-support problem for the central claim, but it is not a circular derivation and per the hard rules it does not raise the circularity score. Self-citations are numerous but load-bearing algorithmic results are either described in the text or supported by external literature; they do not form a self-citation chain that forces the conclusions. Overall, the paper has one partial, ancillary reduction-to-fit, while the central cloud claim lacks evidence rather than being circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's assertions rest on standard quantum mechanics and on several domain assumptions. There are no invented physical entities. Two classes of fitted parameters are load-bearing: the fpQAOA universal angles, optimized on a training set, and the emulator noise parameters, chosen to maximize fidelity against real devices. No code or data is shipped, so the numerical results cannot be independently reproduced from the paper.

free parameters (2)
  • fpQAOA universal angles (beta, gamma) = not stated; obtained by heuristic global optimization on a training set
    Section II A: the claimed acceleration over random parameters for linear systems, ODEs, and factorization depends on these angles, and no values or validation details are provided.
  • Emulator noise parameters (T1, T2, depolarizing rates, photon loss, distinguishability, detector noise) = not stated; chosen to maximize fidelity
    Section VI D: the team selected noise parameters to maximize accuracy; the resulting F values in Tables V-VIII are therefore fitted, not predicted.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Standard postulates of quantum mechanics, including the Born rule and unitary evolution
    Used throughout the algorithms, tomography, and emulator sections without proof.
  • domain assumption Fixed-angle transferability hypothesis for QAOA parameters
    Section II A assumes near-optimal QAOA angles transfer between problem instances of the same class; this is empirical and cited from [45-47].
  • domain assumption Depolarizing channel approximation for randomized benchmarking
    Section III relies on the standard result that random Clifford circuits can be effectively modeled by depolarizing channels.
  • standard math Trotter-Suzuki and Jacobi-Anger approximations for Hamiltonian simulation
    Section II C invokes these standard approximations; the QSP phase factors are found numerically, with convergence assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Progress in the development of quantum algorithms and software." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7X2OFTW6

@misc{pith2026250504285,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Progress in the development of quantum algorithms and software},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7X2OFTW6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.04285}
}
read the original abstract

A quantum processor, like any computing device, requires the development of both hardware and the necessary set of software solutions, starting with quantum algorithms and ending with means of accessing quantum devices. As part of the roadmap for the development of the high-tech field of quantum computing in the period from 2020 to 2024, a set of software solutions for quantum computing devices was developed. This software package includes a set of quantum algorithms for solving prototypes of applied tasks, monitoring and benchmarking tools for quantum processors, error suppression and correction methods, tools for compiling and optimizing quantum circuits, as well as interfaces for remote cloud access. This review presents the key results achieved, among which it is necessary to mention the execution of quantum algorithms using a cloud-based quantum computing platform.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

211 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    m – количество мод интерферометра,n – коли- чество фотонов на входе в интерферометр.A – матрицас nстолбцами,составленнымиизстолб- цов унитарной матрицы интерферометраU для тех мод, где есть входные фотоны

  2. [2]

    Любые однокубитные состояния выражают- ся как суперпозиция двух фотонных мод

    В этом случае куби- ту в состоянии|0⟩q соответствует фотонное состояние a† 1|0⟩ph, а|1⟩q –a† 2|0⟩ph, где|0⟩ph– состояние фотонного вакуума. Любые однокубитные состояния выражают- ся как суперпозиция двух фотонных мод. При этом потеря фотона в одной моде или добавление второ- го фотона в моду выводит за пределы вычислитель- ного базиса. Любые однокубитные ...

  3. [3]

    Случайным образом переставить столбцы матрицыA

    Инициализировать пустой массив целых чисел r, в котором будут храниться номера выходных мод, в которых будут обнаружены фотоны в те- кущем сэмпле. Случайным образом переставить столбцы матрицыA

  4. [4]

    Сделать сэмплинг одного числа x из m чисел i ={1,...m } с помощью распределенияwi

    Создать массив изm элементов wi =|Ai1|2, ко- торые будут восприниматься как вероятности. Сделать сэмплинг одного числа x из m чисел i ={1,...m } с помощью распределенияwi. При- соединить числоx к массивуr

  5. [5]

    (l− 1), (l + 1)...k , l = 1...k

    Дляk = 2...n : (a) Сосчитатьперманенты k матрицAr[k\l] раз- мерами (k− 1)× (k− 1), гдеr – элементы массива r, которые интерпретируются как индексы строк матриц, которые были полу- чены при сэмплинге на предыдущих шагах, а индексы [k\l] = 1, 2... (l− 1), (l + 1)...k , l = 1...k . (b) Вычислить m весов wi = |Pk l=1AilPer(Ar[k\l])|2 с помощью вы- численных н...

  6. [6]

    Этот массив и есть сэмпл выходных фотонов

    После выполнения шагаk = n массив r будет содержать n чисел, каждое из которых может принимать значения от 1 до m. Этот массив и есть сэмпл выходных фотонов. Затем его можно перевести в представление чисел заполнения фо- тонных мод. Например,r = [5, 2, 1, 2] становится сэмплом 12001

  7. [7]

    Вернуться на шаг 2 для вычисления нового сэмпла. В связи с тем, что перманенты матрицn×n могут быть вычислены с помощью кода Грея [147], благо- даря эффективному перебору элементов матрицы за O(n2n) операций, а также тем, чтоm весов на шаге 4(b) можно вычислять одновременно, то сложность описанного выше алгоритма – тожеO(n2n). Также ранее использовался ал...

  8. [8]

    Zalivako, N

    I. Zalivako, N. Semenin, N. Zhadnov, P. K. K.P. Galstyan and, V. Smirnov, K. A. Evgenyevich, S. P. Leonidovich, A. Borisenko, Y. Anosov, I. Semerikov, K. Khabarova, and N. Kolachevsky, Quantum computing with trapped ions: principles, achievements and prospects, Physics-Uspekhi (Advances in Physical Sciences) 10.3367/UFNe.2024.12.039884 (2025)

    work page doi:10.3367/ufne.2024.12.039884 2025

Show all 211 references
  1. [9]

    Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring, in Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science(1994) pp

    P. Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring, in Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science(1994) pp. 124–134

    1994

  2. [10]

    Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science273, 1073 (1996)

    S. Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science273, 1073 (1996)

    1996

  3. [11]

    L. K. Grover, Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack, Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 325 (1997)

    1997

  4. [12]

    A. K. Fedorov, N. Gisin, S. M. Beloussov, and A. I. Lvovsky, Quantum computing at the quantum advantage threshold: a down-to-business review (2022), arXiv:2203.17181 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Zhang, G

    J. Zhang, G. Pagano, P. W. Hess, A. Kyprianidis, P. Becker, H. Kaplan, A. V. Gorshkov, Z. X. Gong, and C. Monroe, Observation of a many-body dynamical phase transition with a 53-qubit quantum simulator, Nature 551, 601 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    Blatt and C

    R. Blatt and C. F. Roos, Quantum simulations with trapped ions, Nature Physics8, 277 (2012)

    2012

  7. [15]

    Hempel, C

    C. Hempel, C. Maier, J. Romero, J. McClean, T. Monz, H.Shen,P.Jurcevic,B.P.Lanyon,P.Love,R.Babbush, A. Aspuru-Guzik, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Quantum chemistry calculations on a trapped-ion quantum simulator, Phys. Rev. X8, 031022 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    L. S. Madsen, F. Laudenbach, M. F. Askarani, F. Rortais, T. Vincent, J. F. F. Bulmer, F. M. Miatto, L. Neuhaus, L. G. Helt, M. J. Collins, A. E. Lita, T. Gerrits, S. W. Nam, V. D. Vaidya, M. Menotti, I. Dhand, Z. Vernon, N. Quesada, and J. Lavoie, Quantum computational advanta...

    2022

  9. [17]

    Ebadi, T

    S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pichler, W. W. Ho, S. Choi, S. Sachdev, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature 595, 227 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Scholl, M

    P. Scholl, M. Schuler, H. J. Williams, A. A. Eberharter, D. Barredo, K.-N. Schymik, V. Lienhard, L.-P. Henry, T. C. Lang, T. Lahaye, A. M. L¨ auchli, and A. Browaeys, Quantum simulation of 2d antiferromagnets with hundreds of rydberg atoms, Nature595, 233 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Henriet, L

    L. Henriet, L. Beguin, A. Signoles, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, G.-O. Reymond, and C. Jurczak, Quantum computing with neutral atoms, Quantum4, 327 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    T. M. Graham, Y. Song, J. Scott, C. Poole, L. Phuttitarn, K. Jooya, P. Eichler, X. Jiang, A. Marra, B. Grinkemeyer, M. Kwon, M. Ebert, J. Cherek, M. T. Lichtman, M. Gillette, J. Gilbert, D. Bowman, T. Ballance, C. Campbell, E. D. Dahl, O. Crawford, N. S. Blunt, B. Rogers, T. N...

    2022

  13. [21]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, W. Courtney, A. Dunsworth, E. Farhi, B. Foxen, A. Fowler, C. Gidney, M. Giustina, R. Graff, K. Guerin,...

    2019

  14. [22]

    Wu, W.-S

    Y. Wu, W.-S. Bao, S. Cao, F. Chen, M.-C. Chen, X. Chen, T.-H. Chung, H. Deng, Y. Du, D. Fan, M. Gong, C. Guo, C. Guo, S. Guo, L. Han, L. Hong, H.- L. Huang, Y.-H. Huo, L. Li, N. Li, S. Li, Y. Li, F. Liang, C. Lin, J. Lin, H. Qian, D. Qiao, H. Rong, H. Su, L. Sun, L. Wang, S. W...

    2021

  15. [23]

    Zhong, H

    H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu, P. Hu, X.-Y. Yang, W.-J. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Li, X. Jiang, L. Gan, G. Yang, L. You, Z. Wang, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Quantum computational advantage using photon...

    2020

  16. [24]

    Sapova and A

    M. Sapova and A. Fedorov, Variational quantum eigensolver techniques for simulating carbon monoxide oxidation, Communications Physics5, 199 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    Loss and D

    D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, Quantum computation with quantum dots, Phys. Rev. A57, 120 (1998)

    1998

  18. [26]

    X. Xue, M. Russ, N. Samkharadze, B. Undseth, A. Sammak, G. Scappucci, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Quantum logic with spin qubits crossing the surface code threshold, Nature601, 343 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    M. T. Madzik, S. Asaad, A. Youssry, B. Joecker, K. M. Rudinger, E. Nielsen, K. C. Young, T. J. Proctor, A. D. Baczewski, A. Laucht, V. Schmitt, F. E. Hudson, K. M. Itoh, A. M. Jakob, B. C. Johnson, D. N. Jamieson, A. S. Dzurak, C. Ferrie, R. Blume-Kohout, and A. Morello, Preci...

    2022

  20. [28]

    Noiri, K

    A. Noiri, K. Takeda, T. Nakajima, T. Kobayashi, A. Sammak, G. Scappucci, and S. Tarucha, Fast universal quantum gate above the fault-tolerance threshold in silicon, Nature601, 338 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buell, et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature574, 505 (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    A. K. Fedorov, A. V. Akimov, J. D. Biamonte, A. V. Kavokin, F. Y. Khalili, E. O. Kiktenko, N. N. Kolachevsky, Y. V. Kurochkin, A. I. Lvovsky, A. N. Rubtsov, G. V. Shlyapnikov, S. S. Straupe, A. V. Ustinov, and A. M. Zheltikov, Quantum technologies in russia, Quantum Science an...

    2019

  23. [31]

    A. I. Gircha, A. S. Boev, K. Avchaciov, P. O. Fedichev, and A. K. Fedorov, Hybrid quantum-classical machine learning for generative chemistry and drug design, Scientific Reports 13, 10.1038/s41598-023- 32703-4 (2023)

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    Norkin, E

    D. Norkin, E. Kiktenko, and A. Fedorov, Reliable confidence regions for quantum tomography using distribution moments, Physical Review A109, 032414 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    Shaydulin, C

    R. Shaydulin, C. Li, S. Chakrabarti, M. DeCross, D. Herman, N. Kumar, J. Larson, D. Lykov, P. Minssen, Y. Sun, Y. Alexeev, J. M. Dreiling, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, J. A. Gerber, K. Gilmore, D. Gresh, N.Hewitt,C.V.Horst,S.Hu,J.Johansen,M.Matheny, T. Mengle, M. Mills, S. ...

    2024

  26. [34]

    Kiktenko, and A

    S.R.Usmanov,G.V.Salakhov,A.A.Bozhedarov,E.O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Quantum and quantum- inspired optimization for an in-core fuel management problem, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2701, 012031 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    A. A. Bozhedarov, S. R. Usmanov, G. V. Salakhov, A. S. Boev, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Quantum and quantum-inspiredoptimizationforsolvingtheminimum bin packing problem, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2701, 012129 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. S. Nikolaeva, and A. K. Fedorov, Realization of quantum algorithms with qudits (2023), arXiv:2311.12003 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Efficient realization of quantum algorithms with qudits, EPJ Quantum Technology11, 1 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    M. K. Kurmapu, V. Tiunova, E. Tiunov, M. Ringbauer, C. Maier, R. Blatt, T. Monz, A. K. Fedorov, and A. Lvovsky, Reconstructing complex states of a20-qubit quantum simulator, PRX Quantum4, 040345 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    A. I. Lvovsky and M. G. Raymer, Continuous-variable optical quantum-state tomography, Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 299–332 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    Farhi, J

    E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, A quantum approximate optimization algorithm (2014), arXiv:1411.4028 [quant-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  33. [41]

    E. O. Kiktenko, D. O. Norkin, and A. K. Fedorov, Confidence polytopes for quantum process tomography, New Journal of Physics23, 123022 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    Zolotarev, I

    Y. Zolotarev, I. Luchnikov, J. L´ opez-Sald´ ıvar, A.Fedorov,andE.Kiktenko,Continuousmonitoringfor noisy intermediate-scale quantum processors, Physical Review Applied 19, 10.1103/physrevapplied.19.014027 (2023)

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    Antipov, E

    A. Antipov, E. Kiktenko, and A. Fedorov, Realizing a classofstabilizerquantumerrorcorrectioncodesusinga single ancilla and circular connectivity, Physical Review A 107, 032403 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    A. V. Antipov, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Efficient realization of quantum primitives for shor’s algorithm using pennylane library, PLOS ONE 17, 1 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    Bernstein and U

    E. Bernstein and U. Vazirani, Quantum complexity theory, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’93 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1993) p. 11–20

    1993

  38. [46]

    A. S. Kazmina, I. V. Zalivako, A. S. Borisenko, N. A. Nemkov, A. S. Nikolaeva, I. A. Simakov, A. V. Kuznetsova, E. Y. Egorova, K. P. Galstyan, N. V. Semenin, et al., Demonstration of a parity- time-symmetry-breaking phase transition using superconducting and trapped-ion qutrit...

    2024

  39. [47]

    I. V. Zalivako, A. S. Nikolaeva, A. S. Borisenko, A. E. Korolkov, P. L. Sidorov, K. P. Galstyan, N. V. Semenin, V. N. Smirnov, M. A. Aksenov, K. M. Makushin, E. O. Kiktenko, A. K. Fedorov, I. A. Semerikov, K. Y. Khabarova, and N. N. Kolachevsky, Towards multiqudit quantum proc...

    2025

  40. [48]

    Shaydulin, C

    R. Shaydulin, C. Li, S. Chakrabarti, M. DeCross, D. Herman, N. Kumar, J. Larson, D. Lykov, P. Minssen, Y. Sun, et al., Evidence of scaling advantage for the quantum approximate optimization algorithm on a classically intractable problem, Science Advances 10, eadm6761 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    Roland and N

    J. Roland and N. J. Cerf, Quantum search by local adiabatic evolution, Physical Review A 65, 042308 (2002)

    2002

  42. [50]

    G. G. Guerreschi and A. Y. Matsuura, Qaoa for max- cut requires hundreds of qubits for quantum speed-up, Scientific reports 9, 1 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Zhou, S.-T

    L. Zhou, S.-T. Wang, S. Choi, H. Pichler, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum approximate optimization algorithm: Performance, mechanism, and implementation on near- term devices, Physical Review X10, 021067 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Fern´ andez-Pend´ as, E

    M. Fern´ andez-Pend´ as, E. F. Combarro, S. Vallecorsa, J. Ranilla, and I. F. R´ ua, A study of the performance of classical minimizers in the quantum approximate optimization algorithm, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 404, 113388 (2022)

    2022

  45. [53]

    F. G. Brandao, M. Broughton, E. Farhi, S. Gutmann, and H. Neven, For fixed control parameters the quantum approximate optimization algorithm’s objective function value concentrates for typical instances, arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.04170 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Galda, X

    A. Galda, X. Liu, D. Lykov, Y. Alexeev, and I. Safro, Transferability of optimal qaoa parameters between random graphs, in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) (IEEE, 2021) pp. 171–180

    2021

  47. [55]

    Wurtz and D

    J. Wurtz and D. Lykov, The fixed angle conjecture for qaoa on regular maxcut graphs, arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.00677 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  48. [56]

    B. Yan, Z. Tan, S. Wei, H. Jiang, W. Wang, H. Wang, L. Luo, Q. Duan, Y. Liu, W. Shi, et al., Factoring integers with sublinear resources on a superconducting quantum processor, arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.12372 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Chernyavskiy and B

    A. Chernyavskiy and B. Bantysh, A method to computeqaoafixedangles,RussianMicroelectronics 52, S352–S356 (2023)

    2023

  50. [58]

    A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations, Physical review letters 103, 150502 (2009)

    2009

  51. [59]

    Scherer, B

    A. Scherer, B. Valiron, S.-C. Mau, S. Alexander, E. Van den Berg, and T. E. Chapuran, Concrete resource analysis of the quantum linear-system algorithm used to compute the electromagnetic scattering cross section of a 2d target, Quantum Information Processing 16, 1 (2017)

    2017

  52. [60]

    Aaronson, Read the fine print, Nature Physics11, 291 (2015)

    S. Aaronson, Read the fine print, Nature Physics11, 291 (2015)

    2015

  53. [61]

    Jun, Qubo formulations for a system of linear equations, Results in Control and Optimization 14, 100380 (2024)

    K. Jun, Qubo formulations for a system of linear equations, Results in Control and Optimization 14, 100380 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    H. Lee, S. Noh, and K. Jun, Effective qubo modeling for solving linear systems on d-wave quantum annealing device, inQuantum Information Science, Sensing, and Computation XIV,Vol.12093(SPIE,2022)pp.138–145

    2022

  55. [63]

    I. V. Zalivako, A. Y. Chernyavskiy, A. S. Nikolaeva, A. S. Borisenko, N. V. Semenin, K. P. Galstyan, A. E. Korolkov, S. V. Grebnev, E. O. Kiktenko, K. Y. Khabarova, A. K. Fedorov, I. A. Semerikov, and N. N. Kolachevsky, Experimental factoring integers using fixed-point-qaoa wi...

    2025

  56. [64]

    Love, and A

    J.Romero,R.Babbush,J.R.McClean,C.Hempel,P.J. Love, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Strategies for quantum computing molecular energies using the unitary coupled cluster ansatz, Quantum Science and Technology 4, 014008 (2018)

    2018

  57. [65]

    C. P. Schnorr, Fast factoring integers by svp algorithms, corrected, Cryptology ePrint Archive (2021)

    2021

  58. [66]

    A. K. Lenstra, H. W. Lenstra, and L. Lov´ asz, Factoring polynomials with rational coefficients, Mathematische annalen 261, 515 (1982)

    1982

  59. [67]

    S. V. Grebnev, M. A. Gavreev, E. O. Kiktenko, A. P. Guglya, A. R. Efimov, and A. K. Fedorov, Pitfalls of the sublinear qaoa-based factorization algorithm, IEEE Access 11, 134760 (2023)

    2023

  60. [68]

    Khattar and N

    T. Khattar and N. Yosri, A comment on "factoring integers with sublinear resources on a superconducting quantum processor arXiv:2307.09651 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Peruzzo, J

    A. Peruzzo, J. Mcclean, P. Shadbolt, M. H. Yung, X. Zhou, P. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. O’Brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a quantum processor, Nature communications 5 (2013)

    2013

  62. [70]

    A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum measurements and the abelian stabilizer problem, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex. TR96 (1995)

    1995

  63. [71]

    Aspuru-Guzik, A

    A. Aspuru-Guzik, A. D. Dutoi, P. J. Love, and M. Head- Gordon, Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies, Science 309, 1704 (2005)

    2005

  64. [72]

    Dhand and B

    I. Dhand and B. C. Sanders, Stability of the trotter–suzuki decomposition, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical47, 265206 (2014)

    2014

  65. [73]

    A. C. Y. Li, M. S. Alam, T. Iadecola, A. Jahin, J. Job, D. M. Kurkcuoglu, R. Li, P. P. Orth, A. B. i. e. i. f. m. c. ¨Ozg¨ uler, G. N. Perdue, and N. M. Tubman, Benchmarking variational quantum eigensolvers for the square-octagon-lattice kitaev model, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033071 (2023)

    2023

  66. [74]

    Bentellis, A

    A. Bentellis, A. Matic-Flierl, C. B. Mendl, and J. Lorenz, Benchmarking the variational quantum eigensolver using different quantum hardware, in2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE)(IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2023) pp. 518–523

    2023

  67. [75]

    R. Xia, T. Bian, and S. Kais, Electronic structure calculations and the ising hamiltonian, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B122, 3384 (2017)

    2017

  68. [76]

    D. A. Chermoshentsev, A. O. Malyshev, M. Esencan, E. S. Tiunov, D. Mendoza, A. Aspuru-Guzik, A. K. Fedorov, and A. I. Lvovsky, Polynomial unconstrained binary optimisation inspired by optical simulation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.13167 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  69. [77]

    D. W. Berry, G. Ahokas, R. Cleve, and B. C. Sanders, Efficient quantum algorithms for simulating sparse hamiltonians, Communications in Mathematical Physics 270, 359 (2007)

    2007

  70. [78]

    Hatano and M

    N. Hatano and M. Suzuki, Finding exponential product formulas of higher orders, inQuantum Annealing and Other Optimization Methods, edited by A. Das and B. K. Chakrabarti (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005) pp. 37–68

    2005

  71. [79]

    N. M. Myers, R. Scott, K. Park, and V. W. Scarola, Quantum simulation costs for suzuki-trotter 23 decomposition of quantum many-body lattice models, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 023199 (2023)

    2023

  72. [80]

    Ying, Stable factorization for phase factors of quantum signal processing, Quantum 6, 842 (2022), arXiv:2202.02671 [quant-ph]

    L. Ying, Stable factorization for phase factors of quantum signal processing, Quantum 6, 842 (2022), arXiv:2202.02671 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  73. [81]

    A. M. Childs, Y. Su, M. C. Tran, N. Wiebe, and S. Zhu, Theory of trotter error with commutator scaling, Phys. Rev. X 11, 011020 (2021)

    2021

  74. [82]

    M. R. Garey, D. S. Johnson, and L. Stockmeyer, Some simplified np-complete problems, inProceedings of the sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing (1974) pp. 47–63

    1974

  75. [83]

    Tranter, P

    A. Tranter, P. J. Love, F. Mintert, N. Wiebe, and P. V. Coveney, Ordering of trotterization: Impact on errors in quantum simulation of electronic structure, Entropy21, 10.3390/e21121218 (2019)

    2019 doi

  76. [84]

    J. M. Martyn, Z. M. Rossi, A. K. Tan, and I. L. Chuang, Grand Unification of Quantum Algorithms, PRX Quantum 2, 040203 (2021)

    2021

  77. [85]

    Y. Dong, X. Meng, K. B. Whaley, and L. Lin, Efficient phase-factor evaluation in quantum signal processing, Physical Review A 103, 042419 (2021), arXiv:2002.11649 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Z. M. Rossi and I. L. Chuang, Multivariable quantum signal processing (M-QSP): prophecies of the two-headed oracle, Quantum 6, 811 (2022), arXiv:2205.06261 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  79. [87]

    S. E. Skelton, Mostly Harmless Methods for QSP-Processing with Laurent Polynomials (2024), arXiv:2408.04321 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  80. [88]

    S. Gu, R. D. Somma, and B. ¸ Sahino˘ glu, Fast- forwarding quantum evolution, Quantum5, 577 (2021), arXiv:2105.07304 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    S¨ underhauf, E

    C. S¨ underhauf, E. Campbell, and J. Camps, Block- encoding structured matrices for data input in quantum computing, Quantum 8, 1226 (2024), arXiv:2302.10949 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Camps and R

    D. Camps and R. V. Beeumen, FABLE: Fast Approximate Quantum Circuits for Block-Encodings, in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE)(2022) pp. 104–113, arXiv:2205.00081 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Lamm, Y.-Y

    H. Lamm, Y.-Y. Li, J. Shu, Y.-L. Wang, and B. Xu, Block encodings of discrete subgroups on a quantum computer, Physical Review D110, 054505 (2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    Boyd, Low-Overhead Parallelisation of LCU via CommutingOperators(2024),arXiv:2312.00696[quant- ph]

    G. Boyd, Low-Overhead Parallelisation of LCU via CommutingOperators(2024),arXiv:2312.00696[quant- ph]

    2024 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Gily´ en,Quantum singular value transformation & its algorithmic applications, Ph.D

    A. Gily´ en,Quantum singular value transformation & its algorithmic applications, Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam (2019)

    2019

  86. [94]

    G. H. Low and I. L. Chuang, Optimal Hamiltonian Simulation by Quantum Signal Processing, Physical Review Letters 118, 010501 (2017), arXiv:1606.02685 [quant-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  87. [95]

    J. M. Martyn, Y. Liu, Z. E. Chin, and I. L. Chuang, Efficient Fully-Coherent Quantum Signal Processing Algorithms for Real-Time Dynamics Simulation, The Journal of Chemical Physics 158, 024106 (2023), arXiv:2110.11327 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Li and Z

    H. Li and Z. Lin, Accelerated proximal gradient methods for nonconvex programming, Advances in neural information processing systems28 (2015)

    2015

  89. [97]

    Atia and D

    Y. Atia and D. Aharonov, Fast-forwarding of Hamiltonians and exponentially precise measurements, Nature Communications 8, 1572 (2017)

    2017

  90. [98]

    K¨ okc¨ u, T

    E. K¨ okc¨ u, T. Steckmann, Y. Wang, J. K. Freericks, E. F. Dumitrescu, and A. F. Kemper, Fixed Depth Hamiltonian Simulation via Cartan Decomposition, Physical Review Letters 129, 070501 (2022), arXiv:2104.00728 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  91. [99]

    B. I. Bantysh, A. Y. Chernyavskiy, and Y. I. Bogdanov, Quantum tomography benchmarking, Quantum Information Processing 20, 339 (2021)

    2021

  92. [100]

    Mohseni, A

    M. Mohseni, A. T. Rezakhani, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum-process tomography: Resource analysis of different strategies, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics77, 032322 (2008)

    2008

  93. [101]

    Y. Chen, M. Farahzad, S. Yoo, and T.-C. Wei, Detector tomography on ibm quantum computers and mitigation of an imperfect measurement, Physical Review A100, 052315 (2019)

    2019

  94. [102]

    Y. I. Bogdanov, M. Chekhova, L. Krivitsky, S. Kulik, A. Penin, A. Zhukov, L. C. Kwek, C. H. Oh, and M. Tey, Statistical reconstruction of qutrits, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics70, 042303 (2004)

    2004

  95. [103]

    ЮИ, Богданов, Унифицированный метод статисти- ческого восстановления квантовых состояний, ос- нованный на процедуре очищения, Журнал экспе- риментальной и теоретической физики 135, 1068 (2009)

    2009

  96. [104]

    Javadi-Abhari, M

    A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, C. J. Wood, J. Lishman, J. Gacon, S. Martiel, P. D. Nation, L. S. Bishop, A. W. Cross, B. R. Johnson, and J. M. 24 Gambetta, Quantum computing with Qiskit (2024), arXiv:2405.08810 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Kiktenko, D

    E. Kiktenko, D. Norkin, and A. Fedorov, Confidence polytopes for quantum process tomography, New Journal of Physics23, 123022 (2021)

    2021

  98. [106]

    Magesan, J

    E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, B. R. Johnson, C. A. Ryan, J. M. Chow, S. T. Merkel, M. P. Da Silva, G. A. Keefe, M. B. Rothwell, T. A. Ohki, et al., Efficient measurement of quantum gate error by interleaved randomized benchmarking, Physical review letters109, 080505 (2012)

    2012

  99. [107]

    A. W. Cross, L. S. Bishop, S. Sheldon, P. D. Nation, and J. M. Gambetta, Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits, Physical Review A 100, 032328 (2019)

    2019

  100. [108]

    Pechen, D

    A. Pechen, D. Prokhorenko, R. Wu, and H. Rabitz, Control landscapes for two-level open quantum systems, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical41, 045205 (2008)

    2008

  101. [109]

    A. Oza, A. Pechen, J. Dominy, V. Beltrani, K. Moore, and H. Rabitz, Optimization search effort over the control landscapes for open quantum systems with kraus-map evolution, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical42, 205305 (2009)

    2009

  102. [110]

    I. A. Luchnikov, M. E. Krechetov, and S. N. Filippov, Riemannian geometry and automatic differentiation for optimizationproblemsofquantumphysicsandquantum technologies, New Journal of Physics23, 073006 (2021)

    2021

  103. [111]

    Luchnikov, A

    I. Luchnikov, A. Ryzhov, S. Filippov, and H. Ouerdane, Qgopt: Riemannian optimization for quantum technologies, Scipost physics10, 079 (2021)

    2021

  104. [112]

    Barenco, C

    A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. P. DiVincenzo, N. Margolus, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. A. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter, Elementary gates for quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A52, 3457 (1995)

    1995

  105. [113]

    Developers, Cirq (2024)

    C. Developers, Cirq (2024)

    2024

  106. [114]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Generalized toffoli gate decomposition using ququints: Towards realizing grover’s algorithm with qudits, Entropy 25, 10.3390/e25020387 (2023)

    2023 doi

  107. [115]

    P. W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, Phys. Rev. A52, R2493 (1995)

    1995

  108. [116]

    M. D. Reed, L. DiCarlo, S. E. Nigg, L. Sun, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Realization of three- qubit quantum error correction with superconducting circuits, Nature 482, 382 (2012)

    2012

  109. [117]

    Y. Dong, X. Meng, K. B. Whaley, and L. Lin, Efficient phase-factor evaluation in quantum signal processing, Physical Review A103, 042419 (2021)

    2021

  110. [118]

    Shi, Both toffoli and controlled-not need little help to do universal quantum computing, Quantum Info

    Y. Shi, Both toffoli and controlled-not need little help to do universal quantum computing, Quantum Info. Comput. 3, 84 (2003)

    2003

  111. [119]

    Aharonov, A simple proof that toffoli and hadamard are quantum universal (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0301040

    D. Aharonov, A simple proof that toffoli and hadamard are quantum universal (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0301040

    2003 arXiv

  112. [120]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, I. V. Zalivako, A. S. Borisenko, N. V. Semenin, K. P. Galstyan, A. E. Korolkov, E. O. Kiktenko, K. Y. Khabarova, I. A. Semerikov, A. K. Fedorov, and N. N. Kolachevsky, Scalable improvement of the generalized toffoli gate realization using trapped- ion-based qu...

    2024 arXiv

  113. [121]

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. S. Nikolaeva, P. Xu, G. V. Shlyapnikov, and A. K. Fedorov, Scalable quantum computing with qudits on a graph, Phys. Rev. A101, 022304 (2020)

    2020

  114. [122]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Decomposing the generalized toffoli gate with qutrits, Phys. Rev. A105, 032621 (2022)

    2022

  115. [123]

    A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Universal quantum computing with qubits embedded in trapped-ion qudits, Physical Review A109, 022615 (2024)

    2024

  116. [124]

    A. D. Hill, M. J. Hodson, N. Didier, and M. J. Reagor, Realization of arbitrary doubly-controlled quantum phase gates (2021)

    2021

  117. [125]

    J. Chu, X. He, Y. Zhou, J. Yuan, L. Zhang, Q. Guo, Y. Hai, Z. Han, C.-K. Hu, W. Huang, H. Jia, D. Jiao, S. Li, Y. Liu, Z. Ni, L. Nie, X. Pan, J. Qiu, W. Wei, W. Nuerbolati, Z. Yang, J. Zhang, Z. Zhang, W. Zou, Y. Chen, X. Deng, X. Deng, L. Hu, J. Li, S. Liu, Y. Lu, J. Niu, D. ...

    2022

  118. [126]

    Sørensen and K

    A. Sørensen and K. M ølmer, Quantum computation with ions in thermal motion, Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 1971 (1999)

    1999

  119. [127]

    S ørensen and K

    A. S ørensen and K. M ølmer, Entanglement and quantum computation with ions in thermal motion, Phys. Rev. A62, 022311 (2000)

    2000

  120. [128]

    Hilder, D

    J. Hilder, D. Pijn, O. Onishchenko, A. Stahl, M. Orth, B. Lekitsch, A. Rodriguez-Blanco, M. M¨ uller, F. Schmidt-Kaler, and U. G. Poschinger, Fault- tolerant parity readout on a shuttling-based trapped-ion quantum computer, Phys. Rev. X12, 011032 (2022)

    2022

  121. [129]

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. K. Fedorov, O. V. Man’ko, and V. I. Man’ko, Multilevel superconducting circuits as two-qubit systems: Operations, state preparation, and entropic inequalities, Phys. Rev. A91, 042312 (2015)

    2015

  122. [130]

    Kiktenko, A

    E. Kiktenko, A. Fedorov, A. Strakhov, and V. Man’ko, Single qudit realization of the deutsch algorithm using superconducting many-level quantum circuits, Physics Letters A 379, 1409 (2015)

    2015

  123. [131]

    D. C. McKay, C. J. Wood, S. Sheldon, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Efficient z gates for quantum computing, Physical Review A96, 022330 (2017)

    2017

  124. [132]

    D. A. Drozhzhin, A. S. Nikolaeva, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, Transpiling quantum assembly language circuits to a qudit form, Entropy26, 1129 (2024)

    2024

  125. [133]

    D. Nigg, M. M¨ uller, E. A. Martinez, P. Schindler, M. Hennrich, T. Monz, M. A. Martin-Delgado, and R. Blatt, Quantum computations on a topologically encoded qubit, Science345, 302–305 (2014)

    2014

  126. [134]

    C. K. Andersen, A. Remm, S. Lazar, S. Krinner, N. Lacroix, G. J. Norris, M. Gabureac, C. Eichler, and A. Wallraff, Repeated quantum error detection in a surface code, Nature Physics16, 875–880 (2020)

    2020

  127. [135]

    Z. Chen, K. J. Satzinger, J. Atalaya, A. N. Korotkov, A. Dunsworth, D. Sank, C. Quintana, M. McEwen, R. Barends, P. V. Klimov, S. Hong, C. Jones, A. Petukhov, D. Kafri, S. Demura, B. Burkett, C. Gidney, A. G. Fowler, A. Paler, H. Putterman, I. Aleiner, F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Ba...

    2021

  128. [136]

    A. W. Cross, L. S. Bishop, J. A. Smolin, and J. M. Gambetta, Open quantum assembly language (2017), arXiv:1707.03429 [quant-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Acharya, I

    R. Acharya, I. Aleiner, R. Allen, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, J. Atalaya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, J. Basso, A. Bengtsson, S. Boixo, G. Bortoli, A. Bourassa, J. Bovaird, L. Brill, M. Broughton, B. B. Buckley, D. A. Buell, T. Burger, B. B...

    2022 arXiv

  130. [138]

    Acharya, L

    R. Acharya, L. Aghababaie-Beni, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, N. Astrakhantsev, J. Atalaya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, B. Ballard, J. C. Bardin, J. Bausch, A. Bengtsson, A. Bilmes, S. Blackwell, S. Boixo, G. Bortoli, A. Bourassa, J. Bovaird, L...

    2024 arXiv

  131. [139]

    Bluvstein, H

    D. Bluvstein, H. Levine, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, M. Kalinowski, A. Keesling, N. Maskara, H. Pichler, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays, Nature604, 451–456 (2022)

    2022

  132. [140]

    Bluvstein, S

    D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Zhou, T. Manovitz, S. Ebadi, M. Cain, M. Kalinowski, D. Hangleiter, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, N. Maskara, I. Cong, X. Gao, P. Sales Rodriguez, T. Karolyshyn, G. Semeghini, M. J. Gullans, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Luki...

    2023

  133. [141]

    M. A. Gavreev, E. O. Kiktenko, A. S. Mastiukova, and A. K. Fedorov, Suppressing decoherence in quantum state transfer with unitary operations, Entropy25, 67 (2022)

    2022

  134. [142]

    Zhong, H

    H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu,et al., Quantum computational advantage using photons, Science 370, 1460 (2020)

    2020

  135. [143]

    Sudarshan, P

    E. Sudarshan, P. Mathews, and J. Rau, Stochastic dynamics of quantum-mechanical systems, Physical Review 121, 920 (1961)

    1961

  136. [144]

    Killoran, J

    N. Killoran, J. Izaac, N. Quesada, V. Bergholm, M. Amy, and C. Weedbrook, Strawberry fields: A software platform for photonic quantum computing (2019), arXiv:arXiv:1804.03159v2 [quant-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  137. [145]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2010)

    2010

  138. [146]

    M. A. Aksenov, I. V. Zalivako, I. A. Semerikov, A. S. Borisenko, N. V. Semenin, P. L. Sidorov, A. K. Fedorov, K. Y. Khabarova, and N. N. Kolachevsky, Realizing quantum gates with optically addressable 171Yb+ ion qudits, Phys. Rev. A107, 052612 (2023)

    2023

  139. [147]

    Ringbauer, M

    M. Ringbauer, M. Meth, L. Postler, R. Stricker, R. Blatt, P. Schindler, and T. Monz, A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions, Nature Physics 18, 1053 (2022)

    2022

  140. [148]

    Knill, R

    E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn, A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics, nature 409, 46 (2001). 26

    2001

  141. [149]

    M. A. Nielsen, Cluster-state quantum computation, Reports on Mathematical Physics57, 147 (2006)

    2006

  142. [150]

    Bartolucci, P

    S. Bartolucci, P. Birchall, H. Bombin, H. Cable, C. Dawson, M. Gimeno-Segovia, E. Johnston, K. Kieling, N. Nickerson, M. Pant, et al., Fusion- based quantum computation, Nature Communications 14, 912 (2023)

    2023

  143. [151]

    Ломоносова

    в МГУ им. Ломоносова. В ходе сравнения были определены параметры моделей декогеренции разра- ботанныхэмуляторов,способныеадекватнымобразом отразить неидеальности физических устройств. Для анализа близости статистических распреде- лений, полученных с помощью эмуляторов и физи- ...

    2021

  144. [152]

    J. L. O’Brien, G. J. Pryde, A. G. White, T. C. Ralph, and D. Branning, Demonstration of an all- optical quantum controlled-not gate, Nature426, 264 (2003)

    2003

  145. [153]

    Skryabin, I

    N. Skryabin, I. Kondratyev, I. Dyakonov, O. Borzenkova, S. Kulik, and S. Straupe, Two- qubit quantum photonic processor manufactured by femtosecond laser writing, Applied Physics Letters122 (2023)

    2023

  146. [154]

    Aaronson and A

    S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, The computational complexity of linear optics, inProceedings of the forty- third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing (2011) pp. 333–342

    2011

  147. [155]

    Clifford and R

    P. Clifford and R. Clifford, The classical complexity of boson sampling, inProceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SIAM, 2018) pp. 146–155

    2018

  148. [156]

    Umanskii and A

    M. Umanskii and A. N. Rubtsov, Classical modelling of a bosonic sampler with photon collisions, Entropy25, 210 (2023)

    2023

  149. [157]

    Metropolis and S

    N. Metropolis and S. Ulam, The monte carlo method, Journal of the American statistical association44, 335 (1949)

    1949

  150. [158]

    Heurtel, A

    N. Heurtel, A. Fyrillas, G. De Gliniasty, R. Le Bihan, S. Malherbe, M. Pailhas, E. Bertasi, B. Bourdoncle, P.- E. Emeriau, R. Mezher, et al., Perceval: A software platform for discrete variable photonic quantum computing (2023)

    2023

  151. [159]

    I. A. Iakovlev, O. M. Sotnikov, I. V. Dyakonov, E. O. Kiktenko, A. K. Fedorov, S. S. Straupe, and V. V. Mazurenko, Benchmarking a boson sampler with hamming nets, Physical Review A 108, 10.1103/physreva.108.062420 (2023)

    2023 doi

  152. [160]

    K. D. S. Tuli E. A., Lee J. M., Integration of quantum technologies into metaverse: Applications, potentials, and challenges, IEEE Access 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3366527 (2024)

    2024

  153. [161]

    Zhahir, S

    A. Zhahir, S. Mohd, M. I. M Shuhud, B. Idrus, H. Zainuddin, N. Mohamad Jan, and M. R. Wahiddin, Quantum computing in the cloud - a systematic literature review, International journal of electrical and computer engineering systems15, 185 (2024)

    2024

  154. [162]

    H. T. Nguyen, M. Usman, and R. Buyya, Qfaas: A serverless function-as-a-service framework for quantum computing, Future Generation Computer Systems154, 281 (2024)

    2024

  155. [163]

    H. Goto, K. Tatsumura, and A. R. Dixon, Combinatorial optimization by simulating adiabatic bifurcations in nonlinear hamiltonian systems, Science Advances 5, eaav2372 (2019), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.aav2372

    2019 doi

  156. [164]

    I. V. Zalivako, A. I. Gircha, A. S. Nikolaeva, D. A. Drozhzhin, A. S. Borisenko, A. E. Korolkov, N. V. Semenin, K. P. Galstyan, P. A. Kamenskikh, V. N. Smirnov, M. A. Aksenov, P. L. Sidorov, E. O. Kiktenko, K. Y. Khabarova, A. K. Fedorov, N. N. Kolachevsky, and I. A. Semerikov...

    2024 arXiv

  157. [165]

    Pyrkov, A

    A. Pyrkov, A. Aliper, D. Bezrukov, Y.-C. Lin, D. Polykovskiy, P. Kamya, F. Ren, and A. Zhavoronkov, Quantum computing for near-term applications in generative chemistry and drug discovery, Drug Discovery Today28, 103675 (2023)

    2023

  158. [166]

    Kao, Y.-C

    P.-Y. Kao, Y.-C. Yang, W.-Y. Chiang, J.-Y. Hsiao, Y. Cao, A. Aliper, F. Ren, A. Aspuru-Guzik, A. Zhavoronkov, M.-H. Hsieh, and Y.-C. Lin, Exploring the advantages of quantum generative adversarial networks in generative chemistry, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 6...

    2023 doi

  159. [167]

    Алгоритм Дойча-Йожи классификации сбалан- сированных и константных функций

  160. [168]

    Алгоритм Саймона определения периода буле- вой функции по отношению к операции «исклю- чающее ИЛИ»

  161. [169]

    Алгоритм обменного теста сравнения квантовых состояний

  162. [170]

    Алгоритм оценки фазы собственного числа уни- тарного оператора

  163. [171]

    Алгоритм нахождения периода целочисленной функции

  164. [172]

    Алгоритм из семейства алгоритмов квантовой приближенной оптимизации

  165. [173]

    Алгоритм симуляции протокола квантового рас- пределения ключей

  166. [174]

    Алгоритм Шора для факторизации составных чисел

  167. [175]

    Алгоритм Шора для дискретного логарифмиро- вания

  168. [176]

    Алгоритм квантового вариационного поиска собственных значений

  169. [177]

    Алгоритм поиска основного состояния молеку- лы

  170. [178]

    Алгоритм симуляции протокола сверхплотного кодирования. 27

  171. [179]

    Алгоритм приближенного квантового преобра- зования Фурье

  172. [180]

    Алгоритм моделирования спектров возбужде- ния молекулы

  173. [181]

    Алгоритм моделирования 1D магнитных мате- риалов

  174. [182]

    Алгоритм моделирования 2D магнитных мате- риалов

  175. [183]

    Алгоритм симуляции протоколов однонаправ- ленной и двунаправленной квантовой телепор- тации

  176. [184]

    Алгоритм квантового градиентного спуска

  177. [185]

    Алгоритм Бернштейна-Вазирани

  178. [186]

    Алгоритм оценки фазы с использованием при- ближенного квантового преобразования Фурье

  179. [187]

    Алгоритм из семейства алгоритмов решения си- стемы линейных уравнений

  180. [188]

    Алгоритм вариационного поиска собственных значений на основе методов оптимизации на многообразиях

  181. [189]

    Алгоритм вариационного расчета динамики квантовых систем на основе методов оптимиза- ции на многообразиях

  182. [190]

    Алгоритм приготовления многокубитных запу- танных квантовых состояний

  183. [191]

    Алгоритм дискретной оптимизации для задач планирования

  184. [192]

    Алгоритм бинарной классификации изображе- ний цифр методом опорных векторов с исполь- зованием квантового ядра

  185. [193]

    Алгоритм вариационной компрессии квантовых состояний

  186. [194]

    Алгоритм квантового метода опорных векторов

  187. [195]

    Алгоритм моделирования квантовой динамики многочастичных квантовых систем

  188. [196]

    Алгоритм квантовой химии на основе решения задачи Изинга

  189. [197]

    Алгоритм решения дифференциальных уравне- ний

  190. [198]

    Алгоритм дискретной оптимизации для графо- вых задач

  191. [199]

    Алгоритм с использованием квантовой нейрон- ной сети для бинарной классификации изобра- жений рентгена грудной клетки

  192. [200]

    Алгоритм спектральной кластеризации искус- ственно сгенерированных данных с использова- нием квантового ядра

  193. [201]

    Алгоритм симуляции неэрмитовых фазовых пе- реходов на кутритном квантовом процессоре. B. Перечень методов подавления и коррекции ошибок, реализованных в рамках дорожной карты развития высокотехнологичной области «Квантовые вычисления»

  194. [202]

    Пятикубитный код подавления и коррекции ошибок для кругового типа соединений с одной анциллой

  195. [203]

    Код коррекции ошибок с возможностью выпол- нения операции типа X над двумя логическими кубитами

  196. [204]

    Программный код для кодов коррекции оши- бок с использованием пространства состояний осциллятора

  197. [205]

    Математическая модель идентификации немар- ковского квантового процесса на основе марков- ского вложения

  198. [206]

    Математическая модель идентификации и пред- сказания немарковского квантового процесса на основе марковского вложения. C. Перечень эмуляторов квантовых процессоров, реализованных в рамках дорожной карты развития высокотехнологичной области «Квантовые вычисления»

  199. [207]

    Квантовый эмулятор бозонного сэмплинга с 30 модами

  200. [208]

    Эмулятор идеального квантового процессора с 30 кубитами

  201. [209]

    Вторая версия эмулятора для квантового про- цессора на основе модели KLM

  202. [210]

    Программный эмулятор бифуркационной маши- ны «SimBif»

  203. [211]

    Программный эмулятор ионного кудитного квантового вычислителя IQC_Sim

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.