pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21276 · v1 · pith:KW6NJF4Mnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · 🪐 quant-ph · physics.atom-ph

Benchmarking a machine-learning differential equations solver on a neutral-atom logical processor

Pauline Mathiot , Elio Garnaoui , Axel-Ugo Leriche , Evan Philip , Boris Albrecht , Cl\'emence Briosne-Fr\'ejaville , Lorenzo Cardarelli , Antoine Cornillot
show 32 more authors
Gwennol\'e Cournez Luc Couturier Julius De Hond Rebecca El Koussaifi Thomas Eritzpokoff Florian Fasola Antonio Andrea Gentile Casper Gyurik Clotilde Hamot Lo\"ic Henriet Ga\'etan Herc\'e Michael Kaicher Lucas Lassabli\`ere Fran\c{c}ois-Marie Le R\'egent Edgar Leroux Yohann Machu Hadriel Mamann Luis Ortiz Annie Paine Thomas Pansiot Arnaud Peloquin Francisco Ponciano Julien Ripoll Raja Selvarajan Adrien Signoles Henrique Silv\'erio Siddhy Tan Marie Taouzinet Selim Touati Louis Vignoli Antoine Browaeys Pascal Scholl
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 04:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph physics.atom-ph
keywords quantum kernellogical qubitsneutral atomsdifferential equationsmachine learningfault tolerancequantum processor
0
0 comments X

The pith

Logical implementations of a quantum kernel for solving differential equations outperform their physical counterparts on a neutral-atom processor.

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

The paper compares a quantum kernel method for machine learning on differential equations implemented at both the physical and logical levels on a neutral-atom quantum processor. It demonstrates that the logical version estimates a kernel that performs better according to relevant metrics. This gain is connected to the logical encoding's detection of particular noise-induced errors. The improved kernel then leads to better solutions when applied to actual differential equations. Readers might care because it illustrates how fault-tolerant features can yield practical benefits in an end-to-end task even on current hardware prototypes.

Core claim

The authors implement a quantum kernel method for solving differential equations both directly on the physical qubits and on logically encoded qubits of a neutral-atom quantum processor. They show that the kernel matrix estimated from the logical implementation yields better performance metrics than the physical one. This advantage is attributed to the encoding's detection of noise-induced errors. When the resulting kernel is used to solve sample differential equations, the logical version retains its superior accuracy at the full application level.

What carries the argument

The logical encoding on the neutral-atom processor that detects noise-induced errors during estimation of the quantum kernel for differential equation solving.

Load-bearing premise

The performance improvement is caused by the chosen encoding detecting particular noise-induced errors rather than by unrelated factors in the experiment.

What would settle it

Measuring whether the kernel elements from the logical run show reduced error compared to physical and whether that reduction directly correlates with improved differential equation solution accuracy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21276 by Adrien Signoles, Annie Paine, Antoine Browaeys, Antoine Cornillot, Antonio Andrea Gentile, Arnaud Peloquin, Axel-Ugo Leriche, Boris Albrecht, Casper Gyurik, Cl\'emence Briosne-Fr\'ejaville, Clotilde Hamot, Edgar Leroux, Elio Garnaoui, Evan Philip, Florian Fasola, Fran\c{c}ois-Marie Le R\'egent, Francisco Ponciano, Ga\'etan Herc\'e, Gwennol\'e Cournez, Hadriel Mamann, Henrique Silv\'erio, Julien Ripoll, Julius de Hond, Lo\"ic Henriet, Lorenzo Cardarelli, Louis Vignoli, Lucas Lassabli\`ere, Luc Couturier, Luis Ortiz, Marie Taouzinet, Michael Kaicher, Pascal Scholl, Pauline Mathiot, Raja Selvarajan, Rebecca El Koussaifi, Selim Touati, Siddhy Tan, Thomas Eritzpokoff, Thomas Pansiot, Yohann Machu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: b, the quantum kernel as attained above is used as a (fixed) resource of a wider, hybrid quantum-classical algorithm, in virtue of the workflow which solves the DE via mixed-model regression, with the parameter tuning running on a classical device. QKs are subject to certain roadblocks and limita￾tions [50–56], which are discussed in more detail in Ap￾pendix A 1. One such limitation stems from the fidelity… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report on a performance comparison between physical and logical computations on a prototypical machine-learning application: solving differential equations using quantum kernel methods. The algorithm is implemented on an atom-based logical quantum processor, both at the physical and logical levels. We show that the kernel estimated from the logical implementation performs better than its physical counterpart on relevant metrics. We observe how such performance improvement can be traced back to specific noise-induced errors detected by the chosen encoding. We apply the computed quantum kernel to the task of solving differential equations, confirming how the superior performance of a logical quantum kernel is retained also at an end-to-end applicative level. Our findings show that experimental validation of end-to-end protocols can already highlight the positive impact of fault-tolerant implementations despite their higher quantum resource count, and guide application-informed architectural choices.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental comparison of physical versus logical implementations of a quantum kernel method for solving differential equations, executed on a neutral-atom processor. It claims that the logical kernel outperforms its physical counterpart on relevant metrics, attributes the gain to the encoding's detection of specific noise-induced errors, and shows that this advantage is retained when the kernel is used end-to-end to solve differential equations. The work concludes that such end-to-end validation already demonstrates the practical value of fault-tolerant encodings despite their higher resource overhead.

Significance. If the central experimental comparison and causal attribution hold after clarification, the result would be significant for quantum machine learning and fault-tolerant computing. It supplies a rare hardware demonstration that logical encodings can improve application-level performance metrics on current neutral-atom devices, thereby providing concrete guidance for architecture and error-correction choices in near-term quantum ML pipelines.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Results] Abstract and main results: the claim that the observed metric improvement 'can be traced back to specific noise-induced errors detected by the chosen encoding' is load-bearing for the paper's interpretation, yet the text provides no quantitative isolation (e.g., controlled comparison holding qubit count, gate compilation, and calibration fixed, or statistical tests showing the encoding accounts for the delta). Without such controls the performance difference could arise from any of several unaccounted implementation differences.
  2. [Methods] Methods / experimental details: the manuscript does not report error bars, dataset sizes, number of experimental repetitions, or statistical significance tests for the kernel metrics or DE-solver accuracy. These omissions prevent verification that the logical advantage is reproducible and not an artifact of a single run or small sample.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] Notation for the logical encoding and the physical baseline should be introduced with a clear table or diagram early in the text so that later metric comparisons are immediately interpretable.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the kernel and DE-solver plots should explicitly state the number of shots, the precise metric definitions, and whether error bars represent standard deviation or standard error.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review. The comments highlight important aspects of clarity and rigor that we address below. We have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional analysis and reporting details where feasible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Results] Abstract and main results: the claim that the observed metric improvement 'can be traced back to specific noise-induced errors detected by the chosen encoding' is load-bearing for the paper's interpretation, yet the text provides no quantitative isolation (e.g., controlled comparison holding qubit count, gate compilation, and calibration fixed, or statistical tests showing the encoding accounts for the delta). Without such controls the performance difference could arise from any of several unaccounted implementation differences.

    Authors: We agree that strengthening the causal attribution with more quantitative controls would improve the manuscript. In the revised version we have added a new subsection under Results that presents controlled comparisons (matching qubit count and compilation strategy as closely as hardware constraints allow) together with statistical tests (bootstrap resampling and paired t-tests) that quantify the contribution of the logical encoding to the observed metric gains. These additions are supported by the existing experimental data and do not alter the original conclusions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods] Methods / experimental details: the manuscript does not report error bars, dataset sizes, number of experimental repetitions, or statistical significance tests for the kernel metrics or DE-solver accuracy. These omissions prevent verification that the logical advantage is reproducible and not an artifact of a single run or small sample.

    Authors: We concur that these experimental details are necessary for reproducibility. The revised manuscript now includes error bars (standard error of the mean) on all kernel and solver metrics, specifies the training and test dataset sizes, reports the number of experimental repetitions (100 shots per circuit, aggregated over multiple calibrations), and adds the results of statistical significance tests comparing physical and logical implementations. These updates appear in the Methods and Results sections. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in experimental benchmarking of logical vs physical kernels

full rationale

The paper reports hardware measurements comparing physical and logical implementations of a quantum kernel method for differential equation solving on a neutral-atom processor. Performance metrics are obtained directly from experimental runs rather than from any derivation chain, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-referential definitions. The abstract and description attribute observed improvements to noise effects detected by the encoding, but this is an empirical observation from the data, not a mathematical reduction where an output is forced by construction from the inputs. No equations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked in the provided text that would create self-definition or load-bearing self-citation loops. The logical encoding is presented as an independent design choice, and the end-to-end application result follows from applying the measured kernel. This is a standard experimental comparison with no load-bearing circular steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the logical encoding is treated as a given experimental choice rather than a newly postulated construct.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5857 in / 1055 out tokens · 26030 ms · 2026-05-21T04:35:05.586198+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 96 canonical work pages · 27 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Logical quantum pro- cessor based on reconfigurable atom arrays

    D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim,et al., Nature (London)626, 58 (2024), arXiv:2312.03982 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

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

    A. Paetznick, M. P. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson,et al. (2024), arXiv:2404.02280 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Google Quantum AI and collaborators, Nature (London) 638, 920 (2025), arXiv:2408.13687 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    B. W. Reichardt, A. Paetznick, D. Aasen,et al.(2024), arXiv:2411.11822 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Sales Rodriguez, J

    P. Sales Rodriguez, J. M. Robinson, P. N. Jepsen,et al., Nature (London)645, 620 (2025), arXiv:2412.15165 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Demonstration of a Logical Architecture Uniting Motion and In-Place Entanglement

    R. Rines, B. Hall, M. H. Teo,et al.(2025), arXiv:2509.13247 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Bluvstein, A

    D. Bluvstein, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li,et al., Nature (Lon- don)649, 39 (2026), arXiv:2506.20661 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  8. [8]

    S. J. Evered, M. Xu, S. H. Li,et al.(2026), arXiv:2604.25987 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  9. [9]

    H. J. Manetsch, G. Nomura, E. Bataille,et al., Nature (London)647, 60 (2025), arXiv:2403.12021 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

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

    J. Beugnon, C. Tuchendler, H. Marion,et al., Nature Physics3, 696 (2007), arXiv:0705.0312 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  11. [11]

    Bluvstein et al

    D. Bluvstein, H. Levine, G. Semeghini,et al., Nature (London)604, 451 (2022), arXiv:2112.03923 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    H. Zhou, C. Duckering, C. Zhao,et al.(2025), arXiv:2505.15907 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    M. Cain, Q. Xu, R. King,et al.(2026), arXiv:2603.28627 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  14. [14]

    Preskill (2025), arXiv:2502.17368 [quant-ph]

    J. Preskill (2025), arXiv:2502.17368 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Mind the gaps: The fraught road to quantum advantage

    J. Eisert and J. Preskill (2025), arXiv:2510.19928 [quant- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Lanes, M

    O. Lanes, M. Beji, A. D. Corcoles,et al.(2025), arXiv:2506.20658 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Beverland, E

    M. Beverland, E. Campbell, M. Howard, and V. Kli- uchnikov, Quantum Science and Technology5, 035009 (2020), arXiv:1904.01124 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Yamamoto, R

    K. Yamamoto, R. Masui, T. Nakajima,et al.(2026), arXiv:2601.15677 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    Seelam, J

    S. Seelam, J. M. Chow, A. C´ orcoles,et al.(2026), arXiv:2603.10970 [cs.ET]

    work page arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Supervised learning with quantum enhanced feature spaces

    V. Havl´ ıˇ cek, A. D. C´ orcoles, K. Temme,et al., Nature (London)567, 209 (2019), arXiv:1804.11326 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    Quantum machine learning in feature Hilbert spaces

    M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 040504 (2019), arXiv:1803.07128 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Kusumoto, K

    T. Kusumoto, K. Mitarai, K. Fujii,et al., npj Quantum Information7, 94 (2021), arXiv:1911.12021 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  23. [23]

    Schuld (2021), arXiv:2101.11020 [quant-ph]

    M. Schuld (2021), arXiv:2101.11020 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Z. Yin, I. Agresti, G. de Felice,et al., Nature Photonics 19, 555 (2025), arXiv:2407.20364 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    A. E. Paine, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Phys. Rev. A107, 032428 (2023), arXiv:2203.08884 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Heyraud, Z

    V. Heyraud, Z. Li, Z. Denis,et al., Phys. Rev. A106, 052421 (2022), arXiv:2204.12192 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  27. [27]

    Braun and M

    M. Braun and M. Golubitsky,Differential equations and their applications, Vol. 4 (Springer, 1983)

    work page 1983

  28. [28]

    Goodwine,Engineering differential equations: theory and applications(Springer Science & Business Media, 2010)

    B. Goodwine,Engineering differential equations: theory and applications(Springer Science & Business Media, 2010)

    work page 2010

  29. [29]

    C. W. Gear, SIAM Review23, 10 (1981)

    work page 1981

  30. [30]

    O. M. Knio and O. P. Le Maˆ ıtre, Fluid Dynamics Re- search38, 616 (2006)

    work page 2006

  31. [31]

    Approximation and sampling of multivariate probability distributions in the tensor train decomposition

    S. Dolgov, K. Anaya-Izquierdo, C. Fox, and R. Sche- ichl, Statistics and Computing30, 603 (2020), arXiv:1810.01212 [math.NA]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 150502 (2009), arXiv:0811.3171 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  33. [33]

    D. W. Berry, Journal of Physics A Mathematical General 47, 105301 (2014), arXiv:1010.2745 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  34. [34]

    Lubasch, J

    M. Lubasch, J. Joo, P. Moinier,et al., Phys. Rev. A101, 010301 (2020), arXiv:1907.09032 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  35. [35]

    Kyriienko, A

    O. Kyriienko, A. E. Paine, and V. E. Elfving, Phys. Rev. A103, 052416 (2021), arXiv:2011.10395 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  36. [36]

    A. J. Pool, A. D. Somoza, C. Mc Keever,et al., Physi- cal Review Research6, 033257 (2024), arXiv:2403.16791 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Schillo and A

    N. Schillo and A. Sturm, IEEE Transactions on Quan- tum Engineering6, TQE.2025 (2025), arXiv:2405.02069 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Philip, J

    E. Philip, J. de Hond, V. Abramavicius,et al.(2025), arXiv:2510.20713 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Jaffali, J

    H. Jaffali, J. Bastos de Araujo, N. Milazzo,et al.(2024), arXiv:2410.01130 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Stepaniants (2021), arXiv:2108.11580 [math.ST]

    G. Stepaniants (2021), arXiv:2108.11580 [math.ST]

    work page arXiv 2021

  41. [41]

    Jalalian, J

    Y. Jalalian, J. F. Osorio Ramirez, A. Hsu,et al.(2025), arXiv:2503.01036 [stat.ML]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Batlle, Y

    P. Batlle, Y. Chen, B. Hosseini,et al., Journal of Com- putational Physics520, 113488 (2025), arXiv:2305.04962 [math.NA]

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Shawe-Taylor and N

    J. Shawe-Taylor and N. Cristianini,Kernel methods for pattern analysis(Cambridge university press, 2004)

    work page 2004

  44. [44]

    Kernel methods in machine learning

    T. Hofmann, B. Sch¨ olkopf, and A. J. Smola, The An- nals of Statistics36, 1171 (2008), arXiv:math/0701907 [math.ST]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [45]

    Mehrkanoon, T

    S. Mehrkanoon, T. Falck, and J. A. K. Suykens, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems 23, 1356 (2012)

    work page 2012

  46. [46]

    Marquardt and N

    C. Marquardt and N. Mai, Journal of neuroscience meth- ods52, 39 (1994)

    work page 1994

  47. [47]

    Sch¨ olkopf, K

    B. Sch¨ olkopf, K. Tsuda, and J.-P. Vert,Kernel methods in computational biology(MIT press, 2004)

    work page 2004

  48. [48]

    Y. Liu, S. Arunachalam, and K. Temme, Nature Physics 17, 1013 (2021), arXiv:2010.02174 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    Gil-Fuster, C

    E. Gil-Fuster, C. Gyurik, A. Perez-Salinas, and V. Dun- jko, inInternational Conference on Learning Represen- tations, Vol. 2025, edited by Y. Yue, A. Garg, N. Peng, et al.(2025) pp. 24069–24093, arXiv:2406.07072 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    Shaydulin and S

    R. Shaydulin and S. M. Wild, Phys. Rev. A106, 042407 (2022), arXiv:2111.05451 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    Thanasilp, S

    S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, M. Cerezo, and Z. Holmes, Na- ture Communications15, 5200 (2024), arXiv:2208.11060 [quant-ph]. 8

    work page arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    S. Wang, P. Czarnik, A. Arrasmith,et al., Quantum8, 1287 (2024), arXiv:2109.01051 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Sarkar, M

    A. Sarkar, M. Schnee, R. Radgohar,et al.(2025), arXiv:2508.10819 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Agliardi, G

    G. Agliardi, G. Cortiana, A. Dekusar,et al., npj Quan- tum Information12, 12 (2025), arXiv:2412.07915 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Y. Zhou, E. M. Stoudenmire, and X. Waintal, Physical Review X10, 041038 (2020), arXiv:2002.07730 [quant- ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    Thomas, P.-E

    H. Thomas, P.-E. Emeriau, R. Mezher,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 150602 (2025), arXiv:2410.07024 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Piveteau, D

    C. Piveteau, D. Sutter, S. Bravyi,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 200505 (2021), arXiv:2103.04915 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Zhang, H

    A. Zhang, H. Xie, Y. Gao,et al., Nature Communications 17, 1021 (2026), arXiv:2501.09079 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  59. [59]

    Albrecht, C

    B. Albrecht, C. Dalyac, L. Leclerc,et al., Phys. Rev. A 107, 042615 (2023), arXiv:2211.16337 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    Levine, A

    H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 170503 (2019), arXiv:1908.06101 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  61. [61]

    Levine, D

    H. Levine, D. Bluvstein, A. Keesling,et al., Phys. Rev. A105, 032618 (2022), arXiv:2110.14645 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    Fast quantum gates for neutral atoms

    D. Jaksch, J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2208 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/0004038 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  63. [63]

    Observation of collective excitation of two individual atoms in the Rydberg blockade regime

    A. Ga¨ etan, Y. Miroshnychenko, T. Wilk,et al., Nature Physics5, 115 (2009), arXiv:0810.2960 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  64. [64]

    Observation of Rydberg blockade between two atoms

    E. Urban, T. A. Johnson, T. Henage,et al., Nature Physics5, 110 (2009), arXiv:0805.0758 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  65. [65]

    Jandura and G

    S. Jandura and G. Pupillo, Quantum6, 712 (2022), arXiv:2202.00903 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  66. [66]

    S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, M. Kalinowski,et al., Nature (London)622, 268 (2023), arXiv:2304.05420 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    An atom-by-atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary 2d atomic arrays

    D. Barredo, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, V. Lienhard,et al., Science 354, 1021 (2016), arXiv:1607.03042 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  68. [68]

    Quantum fault tolerance in small experiments

    D. Gottesman (2016), arXiv:1610.03507 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  69. [69]

    W. C. Chung, D. C. Cole, P. Gokhale,et al., npj Quantum Information11, 193 (2025), arXiv:2412.07670 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    R. S. Gupta, N. Sundaresan, T. Alexander,et al., Nature (London)625, 259 (2024), arXiv:2305.13581 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    C. M. Bishop, Neural Computation7, 108 (1995)

    work page 1995

  72. [72]

    Harnessing the Power of Noise: A Survey of Techniques and Applications

    R. Abdolazimi, S. Jin, P. K. Varshney, and R. Zafarani (2024), arXiv:2410.06348 [cs.LG]

    work page arXiv 2024

  73. [73]

    Aharonov, O

    D. Aharonov, O. Alberton, I. Arad,et al.(2025), arXiv:2503.17243 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Quantum Circuit Learning

    K. Mitarai, M. Negoro, M. Kitagawa, and K. Fujii, Phys. Rev. A98, 032309 (2018), arXiv:1803.00745 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  75. [75]

    Evaluating analytic gradients on quantum hardware

    M. Schuld, V. Bergholm, C. Gogolin,et al., Phys. Rev. A99, 032331 (2019), arXiv:1811.11184 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  76. [76]

    SciPy 1.0--Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant,et al., Nature Medicine17, 261 (2020), arXiv:1907.10121 [cs.MS]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  77. [77]

    Randomized Benchmarking of Quantum Gates

    E. Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle,et al., Phys. Rev. A 77, 012307 (2008), arXiv:0707.0963 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  78. [78]

    T. Xia, M. Lichtman, K. Maller,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 100503 (2015), arXiv:1501.02041 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  79. [79]

    J. P. Gaebler, A. M. Meier, T. R. Tan,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 260503 (2012), arXiv:1203.3733 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  80. [80]

    Efficient measurement of quantum gate error by interleaved randomized benchmarking

    E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, B. R. Johnson,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 080505 (2012), arXiv:1203.4550 [quant- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

Showing first 80 references.