pith. sign in

arxiv: 2501.12470 · v3 · pith:JMY7YES7new · submitted 2025-01-21 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.ET

Efficient Compilation for Shuttling Trapped-Ion Machines via the Position Graph Architectural Abstraction

Bao Bach , Ilya Safro , Ed Younis This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 04:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.ET
keywords trapped ionQCCDquantum compilationshuttlingposition graphschedulingheuristics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Position graph abstraction enables compilation of shuttling trapped-ion circuits where prior algorithms fail, with 1.45 times average speedup.

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

The paper introduces the position graph as a unifying hardware abstraction for modeling trapped-ion QCCD architectures that use shuttling. Using this model, it develops SHAPER and SHAW heuristic searches that cooperate with permutation-aware mapping to generate valid native instructions respecting physical constraints. These algorithms compile programs successfully for extreme architectures that defeat existing methods. On cases where baselines finish, the new schedules average 1.45 times faster, with peaks at 4 times faster. The work also provides a linear program for optimal schedules to benchmark the heuristics.

Core claim

Using the position graph abstraction to represent QCCD architectures, the SHAPER and SHAW scheduling algorithms produce executable circuits that respect shuttling constraints and dynamics, enabling compilation on extreme architectures and faster schedules than baselines when those baselines succeed.

What carries the argument

The position graph, which models hardware architectures to capture connectivity and shuttling dynamics for trapped-ion machines.

If this is right

  • Compilation succeeds on extreme architectures previously impossible for prior algorithms.
  • Schedules are 1.45 times faster on average than completed baselines.
  • Best cases achieve up to 4 times faster schedules.
  • The linear program allows direct optimality comparisons for the heuristics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The position graph could be adapted to model other movement-based quantum architectures beyond trapped ions.
  • Testing on actual hardware would validate if the speedups translate to real execution times.
  • Combining these heuristics with more advanced mapping techniques might yield further improvements.

Load-bearing premise

The position graph abstraction accurately captures the physical constraints, dynamics, and connectivity of shuttling-based trapped-ion QCCD architectures.

What would settle it

Execution of the new algorithms on an extreme architecture that produces either an invalid circuit or a schedule slower than a successful baseline.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12470 by Bao Bach, Ed Younis, Ilya Safro.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: An example of circuit compilation with and without [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An example of congestion created when trying to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Mapping physical junction to its position graph ab [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: State of position graph after shuttling operations. As the two-qubit gate acted on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: When moving 𝑞2 toward the same trap zone with 𝑞3, there is congestion caused by 𝑞5. Here we show how our algorithm resolves this congestion by moving 𝑞5 out of the trap. As different shuttling operations can be performed at the same time, the figure shows the shuttling operations of 𝑞2 and 𝑞5 parallelly. Algorithm/Circuit # qubits # 2-qubit gates QAOA 16 168 QAOA 20 246 QFT 16 252 QFT 20 353 Quantum Volume… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

With the growth of quantum platforms for gate-based quantum computation, compilation holds a crucial role in deciding the success of the implementation. While there has been rich research in compilation techniques for the superconducting-qubit regime. The trapped-ion architectures, currently leading in robust quantum computations for their reliable operations, still lack competitive compilation strategies. This work introduces a unifying hardware abstraction, the ``position graph'', representing various hardware architectures. With this abstraction, we model trapped-ion Quantum Charge-Coupled Device (QCCD) architectures, enabling high-quality, scalable compilation methods. Specifically, we propose scheduling algorithms called SHuttling-Aware PERmutative (SHAPER) and SHuttling-AWare (SHAW) heuristic searches to tackle the complex constraints and dynamics of trapped-ion machines, with the cooperation of state-of-the-art permutation-aware mapping. These approaches generate executable circuits and native instructions that respect the physical constraints of shuttling-based architectures. We evaluate proposed algorithms across theorized and real architectures using the position graph framework. For completeness, we also introduce a linear program of trapped-ion scheduling that yields the optimal schedules, enabling a direct comparison with our heuristics. Our algorithm can successfully compile programs for extreme architectures where priori algorithms fail. When the baseline does complete, our produced schedules are $1.45$ times faster on average, with best-case speedups up to $4$ times faster.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the 'position graph' as a unifying hardware abstraction for modeling various trapped-ion QCCD shuttling architectures. It proposes two scheduling heuristics, SHAPER (SHuttling-Aware PERmutative) and SHAW (SHuttling-AWare), in conjunction with permutation-aware mapping, and formulates an exact linear program (LP) for optimal schedules. The methods are evaluated on both theoretical and real architectures; the central claims are that the approach compiles successfully on extreme architectures where prior algorithms fail, and that the produced schedules are 1.45 times faster on average (up to 4 times faster in best cases) than baselines when the latter complete.

Significance. If the position-graph abstraction correctly encodes shuttling constraints and the heuristics produce valid native schedules, the work would constitute a meaningful advance in compilation for trapped-ion platforms, which currently lack competitive strategies relative to superconducting qubits. Credit is due for the explicit LP baseline enabling direct optimality comparisons, the explicit heuristics, and the demonstration of compilation on architectures that defeat existing tools.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: 'priori algorithms' should read 'prior algorithms'.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: 'theorized' is likely intended as 'theoretical'.
  3. [Evaluation] The evaluation protocol (number of benchmark circuits, architecture parameters, and exact definition of 'extreme' architectures) should be stated more explicitly in the main text to allow reproduction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive summary of our work and the positive assessment of the position-graph abstraction, SHAPER/SHAW heuristics, and LP baseline. We are pleased that the report recognizes the advance for trapped-ion compilation and the explicit optimality comparisons. No major comments were listed in the report, so we have no point-by-point rebuttals to provide. We are happy to prepare a minor revision incorporating any additional editor or referee suggestions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper presents an algorithmic contribution consisting of the position graph abstraction, SHAPER/SHAW heuristics, permutation-aware mapping, and an explicit LP formulation for optimal schedules. These elements are constructed directly from hardware modeling and search procedures without any reduction of outputs to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. Evaluation proceeds via direct comparison to baselines on theorized and real architectures, with no quoted steps that equate predictions to inputs by construction. The derivation chain remains self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

Central claim rests on the validity of the newly introduced position graph as a faithful model of QCCD hardware; no free parameters are described. The graph itself is the primary invented modeling entity.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Trapped-ion QCCD architectures can be represented as graphs whose nodes are ion positions and whose edges encode allowed shuttling moves and gate constraints.
    Core modeling choice stated when the position graph is introduced as the unifying abstraction.
invented entities (1)
  • position graph no independent evidence
    purpose: Unifying hardware abstraction that represents various trapped-ion QCCD architectures for compilation
    Newly proposed in the paper; no independent evidence outside the work is provided in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5781 in / 1286 out tokens · 36081 ms · 2026-05-23T04:41:11.816032+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. QAP-Router: Tackling Qubit Routing as Dynamic Quadratic Assignment with Reinforcement Learning

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    QAP-Router models qubit routing as dynamic QAP and applies RL with a solution-aware Transformer to cut CNOT counts by 12-30% versus industry compilers on real circuit benchmarks.

  2. Scaling Qubit Mapping and Routing With Position Graph Abstraction and Memoization

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Position graph abstraction with memoized SABRE heuristics scales qubit mapping and routing for TI-QCCD architectures by caching repeated evaluations without altering decisions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

107 extracted references · 107 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Daniel S Abrams and Seth Lloyd. 1999. Quantum algorithm providing exponen- tial speed increase for finding eigenvalues and eigenvectors. Physical Review Letters 83, 24 (1999), 5162

    work page 1999

  2. [2]

    KV Anjan and Timothy Mark Pinkston. 1995. An efficient, fully adaptive dead- lock recovery scheme: DISHA. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual international symposium on Computer architecture . 201–210

    work page 1995

  3. [3]

    Vincenzo Auletta, Angelo Monti, Mimmo Parente, and Pino Persiano. 1999. A linear-time algorithm for the feasibility of pebble motion on trees. Algorithmica 23, 3 (1999), 223–245

    work page 1999

  4. [4]

    Christopher J Ballance, Thomas P Harty, Nobert M Linke, Martin A Sepiol, and David M Lucas. 2016. High-fidelity quantum logic gates using trapped-ion hyperfine qubits. Physical review letters 117, 6 (2016), 060504

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Debjyoti Bhattacharjee, Abdullah Ash Saki, Mahabubul Alam, Anupam Chat- topadhyay, and Swaroop Ghosh. 2019. MUQUT: Multi-constraint quantum circuit mapping on NISQ computers. In 2019 IEEE/ACM international conference on computer-aided design (ICCAD) . IEEE, 1–7

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Jacob Biamonte, Peter Wittek, Nicola Pancotti, Patrick Rebentrost, Nathan Wiebe, and Seth Lloyd. 2017. Quantum machine learning. Nature 549, 7671 (2017), 195–202

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    RB Blakestad, C Ospelkaus, AP VanDevender, JM Amini, Joseph Britton, Dietrich Leibfried, and David J Wineland. 2009. High-fidelity transport of trapped-ion qubits through an X-junction trap array. Physical review letters 102, 15 (2009), 153002

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    RB Blakestad, C Ospelkaus, AP VanDevender, JH Wesenberg, MJ Biercuk, D Leibfried, and David J Wineland. 2011. Near-ground-state transport of trapped- ion qubits through a multidimensional array. Physical Review A—Atomic, Molec- ular, and Optical Physics 84, 3 (2011), 032314

    work page 2011

  9. [9]

    Kenneth R Brown, Jungsang Kim, and Christopher Monroe. 2016. Co-designing a scalable quantum computer with trapped atomic ions. npj Quantum Information 2, 1 (2016), 1–10

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    Colin D Bruzewicz, John Chiaverini, Robert McConnell, and Jeremy M Sage

    work page

  11. [11]

    Applied Physics Reviews 6, 2 (2019)

    Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges. Applied Physics Reviews 6, 2 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    Colin D Bruzewicz, Robert McConnell, John Chiaverini, and Jeremy M Sage. 2016. Scalable loading of a two-dimensional trapped-ion array.Nature communications 7, 1 (2016), 13005

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    Gruia Călinescu, Adrian Dumitrescu, and János Pach. 2008. Reconfigurations in graphs and grids. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 22, 1 (2008), 124–138

    work page 2008

  14. [14]

    Yudong Cao, Jonathan Romero, Jonathan P Olson, Matthias Degroote, Peter D Johnson, Mária Kieferová, Ian D Kivlichan, Tim Menke, Borja Peropadre, Nico- las PD Sawaya, Sukin Sim, Libor Veis, and Alan Aspuru-Guzik. 2019. Quantum chemistry in the age of quantum computing. Chemical reviews 119, 19 (2019), 10856–10915

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    Frodo Kin Sun Chan, Yan Nei Law, Bonny Lu, Tom Chick, Edmond Shiao Bun Lai, and Ming Ge. 2022. Multi-agent pathfinding for deadlock avoidance on rota- tional movements. In 2022 17th International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision (ICARCV) . IEEE, 765–770

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    CR Conner, A Bienfait, H-S Chang, M-H Chou, É Dumur, J Grebel, GA Peairs, RG Povey, H Yan, YP Zhong, et al. 2021. Superconducting qubits in a flip-chip architecture. Applied Physics Letters 118, 23 (2021)

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Cormen, Charles E

    Thomas H. Cormen, Charles E. Leiserson, Ronald L. Rivest, and Clifford Stein

    work page

  18. [18]

    MIT Press

    Introduction to Algorithms (3rd ed.). MIT Press. 693–700 pages. Section on the Floyd-Warshall algorithm

    work page

  19. [19]

    Andrew W Cross, Lev S Bishop, Sarah Sheldon, Paul D Nation, and Jay M Gam- betta. 2019. Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits. Physical Review A 100, 3 (2019), 032328

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Dally and Seitz. 1987. Deadlock-free message routing in multiprocessor inter- connection networks. IEEE Transactions on computers 100, 5 (1987), 547–553

    work page 1987

  21. [21]

    Marc G Davis, Ethan Smith, Ana Tudor, Koushik Sen, Irfan Siddiqi, and Costin Iancu. 2020. Towards optimal topology aware quantum circuit synthesis. In2020 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) . IEEE, 223–234

    work page 2020

  22. [22]

    Matthew DeCross, Reza Haghshenas, Minzhao Liu, Enrico Rinaldi, Johnnie Gray, Yuri Alexeev, Charles H Baldwin, John P Bartolotta, Matthew Bohn, Eli Chertkov, et al. 2024. The computational power of random quantum circuits in arbitrary geometries. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02501 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    Robert D Delaney, Lucas R Sletten, Matthew J Cich, Brian Estey, Maya I Fabrikant, David Hayes, Ian M Hoffman, James Hostetter, Christopher Langer, Steven A Moses, et al. 2024. Scalable Multispecies Ion Transport in a Grid-Based Surface- Electrode Trap. Physical Review X 14, 4 (2024), 041028

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Andrew DeOrio, David Fick, Valeria Bertacco, Dennis Sylvester, David Blaauw, Jin Hu, and Gregory Chen. 2012. A reliable routing architecture and algorithm for NoCs. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 31, 5 (2012), 726–739

    work page 2012

  25. [25]

    Edsger W Dijkstra. 2022. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. In Edsger Wybe Dijkstra: his life, work, and legacy . 287–290

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Jens Domke, Torsten Hoefler, and Wolfgang E Nagel. 2011. Deadlock-free oblivious routing for arbitrary topologies. In 2011 IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium. IEEE, 616–627

    work page 2011

  27. [27]

    Trong Duong, Sang T Truong, Minh Tam, Bao Bach, Ju-Young Ryu, and June- Koo Kevin Rhee. 2022. Quantum neural architecture search with quantum circuits metric and bayesian optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.14115 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    Jonathan Durandau, Janis Wagner, Frédéric Mailhot, Charles-Antoine Brunet, Ferdinand Schmidt-Kaler, Ulrich Poschinger, and Yves Bérubé-Lauzière. 2023. Automated generation of shuttling sequences for a linear segmented ion trap quantum computer. Quantum 7 (2023), 1175

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Masoumeh Ebrahimi and Masoud Daneshtalab. 2017. EbDa: A new theory on de- sign and verification of deadlock-free interconnection networks. In Proceedings of the 44th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture . 703–715

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, and Sam Gutmann. 2014. A quantum approxi- mate optimization algorithm. arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.4028 (2014)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    Michael Foss-Feig, Guido Pagano, Andrew C Potter, and Norman Y Yao. 2024. Progress in trapped-ion quantum simulation. Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 16 (2024)

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    LC Freeman. 1977. A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry (1977)

    work page 1977

  33. [33]

    John P Gaebler, Ting Rei Tan, Yiheng Lin, Y Wan, Ryan Bowler, Adam C Keith, Scott Glancy, Kevin Coakley, Emanuel Knill, Dietrich Leibfried, et al. 2016. High- fidelity universal gate set for be 9+ ion qubits. Physical review letters 117, 6 (2016), 060505

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    Yan Ge, Wu Wenjie, Chen Yuheng, Pan Kaisen, Lu Xudong, Zhou Zixiang, Wang Yuhan, Wang Ruocheng, and Yan Junchi. 2024. Quantum circuit syn- thesis and compilation optimization: Overview and prospects. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00736 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    M Gutiérrez, M Müller, and Alejandro Bermúdez. 2019. Transversality and lattice surgery: Exploring realistic routes toward coupled logical qubits with trapped-ion quantum processors. Physical Review A 99, 2 (2019), 022330

    work page 2019

  36. [36]

    WK Hensinger, S Olmschenk, D Stick, D Hucul, M Yeo, Mark Acton, L Deslau- riers, C Monroe, and J Rabchuk. 2006. T-junction ion trap array for two- dimensional ion shuttling, storage, and manipulation. Applied Physics Letters 88, 3 (2006)

    work page 2006

  37. [37]

    Dylan Herman, Cody Googin, Xiaoyuan Liu, Yue Sun, Alexey Galda, Ilya Safro, Marco Pistoia, and Yuri Alexeev. 2023. Quantum computing for finance. Nature Reviews Physics 5, 8 (2023), 450–465

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    Jonathan P Home, David Hanneke, John D Jost, Jason M Amini, Dietrich Leibfried, and David J Wineland. 2009. Complete methods set for scalable ion trap quantum information processing. Science 325, 5945 (2009), 1227–1230

    work page 2009

  39. [39]

    Quantum computing with Qiskit

    Ali Javadi-Abhari, Matthew Treinish, Kevin Krsulich, Christopher J. Wood, Jake Lishman, Julien Gacon, Simon Martiel, Paul D. Nation, Lev S. Bishop, Andrew W. Cross, Blake R. Johnson, and Jay M. Gambetta. 2024. Quantum computing with Qiskit. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.08810 arXiv:2405.08810 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.08810 2024

  40. [40]

    Mingyu Kang, Hanggai Nuomin, Sutirtha N Chowdhury, Jonathon L Yuly, Ke Sun, Jacob Whitlow, Jesús Valdiviezo, Zhendian Zhang, Peng Zhang, David N Beratan, et al. 2024. Seeking a quantum advantage with trapped-ion quantum simulations of condensed-phase chemical dynamics. Nature Reviews Chemistry (2024), 1–19

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    David Kielpinski, Chris Monroe, and David J Wineland. 2002. Architecture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer. Nature 417, 6890 (2002), 709–711

    work page 2002

  42. [42]

    Morten Kjaergaard, Mollie E Schwartz, Jochen Braumüller, Philip Krantz, Joel I-J Wang, Simon Gustavsson, and William D Oliver. 2020. Superconducting qubits: Current state of play. Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 11, 1 (2020), 369–395

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    Jens Koch, Terri M Yu, Jay Gambetta, Andrew A Houck, David I Schuster, Johannes Majer, Alexandre Blais, Michel H Devoret, Steven M Girvin, and Robert J Schoelkopf. 2007. Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the Cooper pair box. Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 76, 4 (2007), 042319

    work page 2007

  44. [44]

    Efekan Kökcü, Daan Camps, Lindsay Bassman Oftelie, James K Freericks, Wibe A de Jong, Roel Van Beeumen, and Alexander F Kemper. 2022. Algebraic compres- sion of quantum circuits for Hamiltonian evolution. Physical Review A 105, 3 (2022), 032420

    work page 2022

  45. [45]

    D Kornhauser, G Miller, and P Spirakis. 1984. Coordinating Pebble Motion On Graphs, The Diameter Of Permutation Groups, And Applications. InProceedings of the 25th Annual Symposium onFoundations of Computer Science, 1984. 241–250. 13

    work page 1984

  46. [46]

    Fabian Kreppel, Christian Melzer, Diego Olvera Millán, Janis Wagner, Janine Hilder, Ulrich Poschinger, Ferdinand Schmidt-Kaler, and André Brinkmann

    work page

  47. [47]

    Quantum 7 (2023), 1176

    Quantum circuit compiler for a shuttling-based trapped-ion quantum computer. Quantum 7 (2023), 1176

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    Jaroslaw Labaziewicz, Yufei Ge, Paul Antohi, David Leibrandt, Kenneth R Brown, and Isaac L Chuang. 2008. Suppression of heating rates in cryogenic surface- electrode ion traps. Physical review letters 100, 1 (2008), 013001

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    Gushu Li, Yufei Ding, and Yuan Xie. 2019. Tackling the qubit mapping problem for NISQ-era quantum devices. In Proceedings of the twenty-fourth international conference on architectural support for programming languages and operating systems. 1001–1014

    work page 2019

  50. [50]

    Chia-Chun Lin, Amlan Chakrabarti, and Niraj K Jha. 2013. FTQLS: Fault-tolerant quantum logic synthesis. IEEE Transactions on very large scale integration (VLSI) systems 22, 6 (2013), 1350–1363

    work page 2013

  51. [51]

    Norbert M Linke, Dmitri Maslov, Martin Roetteler, Shantanu Debnath, Caroline Figgatt, Kevin A Landsman, Kenneth Wright, and Christopher Monroe. 2017. Experimental comparison of two quantum computing architectures.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 13 (2017), 3305–3310

    work page 2017

  52. [52]

    Ji Liu, Peiyi Li, and Huiyang Zhou. 2022. Not all swaps have the same cost: A case for optimization-aware qubit routing. In2022 IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA) . IEEE, 709–725

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    Ji Liu, Ed Younis, Mathias Weiden, Paul Hovland, John Kubiatowicz, and Costin Iancu. 2023. Tackling the qubit mapping problem with permutation-aware synthesis. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), Vol. 1. IEEE, 745–756

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    Ryan Luna and Kostas E Bekris. 2011. Push and swap: Fast cooperative path- finding with completeness guarantees. In IJCAI, Vol. 11. 294–300

    work page 2011

  55. [55]

    Chaomin Luo, Simon X Yang, and Deborah A Stacey. 2003. Real-time path planning with deadlock avoidance of multiple cleaning robots. In 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 03CH37422), Vol. 3. IEEE, 4080–4085

    work page 2003

  56. [56]

    M Malinowski, DTC Allcock, and CJ Ballance. 2023. How to wire a 1000-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer. PRX Quantum 4, 4 (2023), 040313

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    Manuel Mielenz, Henning Kalis, Matthias Wittemer, Frederick Hakelberg, Ulrich Warring, Roman Schmied, Matthew Blain, Peter Maunz, David L Moehring, Dietrich Leibfried, et al. 2016. Arrays of individually controlled ions suitable for two-dimensional quantum simulations. Nature communications 7, 1 (2016), ncomms11839

    work page 2016

  58. [58]

    Abtin Molavi, Amanda Xu, Martin Diges, Lauren Pick, Swamit Tannu, and Aws Albarghouthi. 2022. Qubit mapping and routing via MaxSAT. In 2022 55th IEEE/ACM international symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) . IEEE, 1078–1091

    work page 2022

  59. [59]

    Carmelo Mordini, Alfredo Ricci Vasquez, Yuto Motohashi, Mose Müller, Maciej Malinowski, Chi Zhang, Karan K Mehta, Daniel Kienzler, and Jonathan P Home

    work page

  60. [60]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.18056 (2024)

    Multi-zone trapped-ion qubit control in an integrated photonics QCCD device. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.18056 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    Lorenzo Moro, Matteo GA Paris, Marcello Restelli, and Enrico Prati. 2021. Quan- tum compiling by deep reinforcement learning. Communications Physics 4, 1 (2021), 178

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    Steven A Moses, Charles H Baldwin, Michael S Allman, R Ancona, L Ascarrunz, C Barnes, J Bartolotta, B Bjork, P Blanchard, M Bohn, et al. 2023. A race-track trapped-ion quantum processor. Physical Review X 13, 4 (2023), 041052

    work page 2023

  63. [63]

    Prakash Murali, Dripto M Debroy, Kenneth R Brown, and Margaret Martonosi

    work page

  64. [64]

    In 2020 ACM/IEEE 47th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA)

    Architecting noisy intermediate-scale trapped ion quantum computers. In 2020 ACM/IEEE 47th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA). IEEE, 529–542

    work page 2020

  65. [65]

    Prakash Murali, Norbert Matthias Linke, Margaret Martonosi, Ali Javadi Abhari, Nhung Hong Nguyen, and Cinthia Huerta Alderete. 2019. Full-stack, real-system quantum computer studies: Architectural comparisons and design insights. In Proceedings of the 46th International Symposium on Computer Architecture . 527– 540

    work page 2019

  66. [66]

    2001.Quantum computation and quantum information

    Michael A Nielsen and Isaac L Chuang. 2001.Quantum computation and quantum information. Vol. 2. Cambridge university press Cambridge

    work page 2001

  67. [67]

    Siyuan Niu, Adrien Suau, Gabriel Staffelbach, and Aida Todri-Sanial. 2020. A hardware-aware heuristic for the qubit mapping problem in the nisq era. IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering 1 (2020), 1–14

    work page 2020

  68. [68]

    Siyuan Niu and Aida Todri-Sanial. 2023. Enabling multi-programming mecha- nism for quantum computing in the NISQ era. Quantum 7 (2023), 925

    work page 2023

  69. [69]

    It’s a small world after all

    Umit Y Ogras and Radu Marculescu. 2006. " It’s a small world after all": NoC performance optimization via long-range link insertion. IEEE Transactions on very large scale integration (VLSI) systems 14, 7 (2006), 693–706

    work page 2006

  70. [70]

    Anabel Ovide, Daniele Cuomo, and Carmen G Almudever. 2024. Scaling and assigning resources on ion trap QCCD architectures. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00225 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Christos H Papadimitriou, Prabhakar Raghavan, Madhu Sudan, and Hisao Tamaki. 1994. Motion planning on a graph. In Proceedings 35th Annual Sympo- sium on Foundations of Computer Science . IEEE, 511–520

    work page 1994

  72. [72]

    Sunghye Park, Daeyeon Kim, Minhyuk Kweon, Jae-Yoon Sim, and Seokhyeong Kang. 2022. A fast and scalable qubit-mapping method for noisy intermediate- scale quantum computers. In Proceedings of the 59th ACM/IEEE Design Automa- tion Conference. 13–18

    work page 2022

  73. [73]

    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. 2021. Demonstration of the trapped-ion quantum CCD computer architec- ture. Nature 592, 7853 (2021), 209–213

    work page 2021

  74. [74]

    Quantinuum. 2023. Quantinuum Unveils Accelerated Roadmap to Achieve Universal Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing by 2030. https: //www.quantinuum.com/press-releases/quantinuum-unveils-accelerated- roadmap-to-achieve-universal-fault-tolerant-quantum-computing-by-2030 Accessed: 2024-11-12

    work page 2023

  75. [75]

    Quantinuum. 2024. Quantinuum Systems. https://www.quantinuum.com/ products-solutions/quantinuum-systems Accessed: 2024-11-22

    work page 2024

  76. [76]

    Stig Elkjær Rasmussen, Kasper Sangild Christensen, Simon Panyella Pedersen, Lasse Bjørn Kristensen, Thomas Bækkegaard, Niels Jakob Søe Loft, and Niko- laj Thomas Zinner. 2021. Superconducting circuit companion—an introduction with worked examples. PRX Quantum 2, 4 (2021), 040204

    work page 2021

  77. [77]

    Daniel Ratner and Manfred Warmuth. 1990. The (n2- 1)-puzzle and related relocation problems. Journal of Symbolic Computation 10, 2 (1990), 111–137

    work page 1990

  78. [78]

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

    work page 2022

  79. [79]

    Daniel Schoenberger, Stefan Hillmich, Matthias Brandl, and Robert Wille

    work page

  80. [80]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14065 (2024)

    Shuttling for Scalable Trapped-Ion Quantum Computers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14065 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.