Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 94 references

Agentic-AI based Mathematical Framework for Commercialization of Energy Resilience in Electrical Distribution System Planning and Operation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A dual-agent reinforcement-learning framework is claimed to make grid-resilience investment commercially viable, adding a market-based layer to distribution-system reconfiguration.

desk verdict The submission is not in reviewable shape—the metadata/full-text mismatch is fatal—and the abstract's headline economic claim (BCR 0.12 as 'sustainable market incentives') is internally inconsistent under standard accounting. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.04170 v1 pith:O3K5KMCA submitted 2025-08-06 eess.SY cs.GTcs.LGcs.SY

Aniket Johri , Divyanshi Dwivedi , Mayukha Pal This is my paper
classification eess.SYcs.GTcs.LGcs.SY
keywords distributionsystemresiliencedual-agentreinforcementlearningproximalpolicyoptimizationmarket-basedmechanismsnetworkreconfigurationdistributedenergyresourcesbenefit-costanalysiscommercialization
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

The paper proposes that market-based mechanisms can make electrical-distribution resilience commercially investable, not just a technical reliability target. Its instrument is a dual-agent Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) framework—one strategic agent choosing distributed-energy-resource switching configurations, one tactical agent adjusting switch states and grid preferences—trained in a custom simulator with stochastic calamities, budget limits, and resilience-cost trade-offs. On ten test episodes the abstract reports an average resilience score of $0.85 \pm 0.08$ and a benefit-cost ratio of $0.12 \pm 0.01$, with up to 200x reward incentives for market profitability. If these numbers hold, a single learned policy could both restore service under emergencies and justify the investment, giving regulators and investors a shared basis for paying for resilience.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the dual-agent Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) scheme, a reinforcement-learning algorithm, interacting with a custom-built dynamic simulation environment. A strategic agent selects optimal DER-driven switching configurations; a tactical agent fine-tunes individual switch states and grid preferences. The environment models stochastic calamity events, budget limits, and resilience-cost trade-offs, and the reward function combines load recovery speed, system robustness, customer satisfaction, and market profitability. This two-level decomposition is what lets the framework adapt to both normal and emergency conditions rather than relying on a static optimization.

What would settle it

Run the same two-level learning architecture on a standardized distribution test feeder with historical weather, load, and repair-cost data, and compare the resilience score and benefit-cost ratio against a conventional reconfiguration or hardening baseline over many sampled storm seasons. If the benefit-cost ratio falls below the utility's cost of capital, or the resilience score is not reproduced outside the custom simulator, the commercialization claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery, as stated in the abstract, is that resilience can be treated as a market commodity within a single decision-making loop. The dual-agent PPO architecture separates the problem into a strategic layer that picks DER-driven switching configurations and a tactical layer that fine-tunes switch states and grid preferences under budget and weather constraints. A unified reward function balances load recovery speed, system robustness, and customer satisfaction against profitability; during calamity steps, 85% of actions selected configurations with four DERs under reward incentives up to 200x. The reported outcomes—average resilience score $0.85 \pm 0.08$ and benefit-cost ratio

Load-bearing premise

The claim collapses if the custom-built simulation environment is not a faithful proxy for real distribution systems, because the resilience score and benefit-cost ratio are measured entirely inside that simulator.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the dual-agent policy holds up, distribution operators could replace separate normal-condition and emergency-condition reconfiguration tools with one learned policy that reacts to budget and weather constraints in real time.
  • A reproducible benefit-cost ratio above the cost of capital would give regulators, utilities, and investors a common accounting unit for resilience, turning it into a tradable service attribute rather than an unquantified reliability cost.
  • The strategic/tactical decomposition—choosing DER configurations, then fine-tuning switches—could transfer to larger networks by separating the combinatorial configuration choice from low-level switching actions.
  • The reward design implies that load recovery speed, robustness, and customer satisfaction can be jointly optimized with profitability; if true, resilience investments would no longer be a pure safety-net expense.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Document-level observation: the full text supplied with this abstract is a survey of co-locating quantum computers with high-performance computing systems; it does not describe the dual-agent PPO simulator, the resilience score, or the benefit-cost ratio. The abstract's numbers should therefore be read as claims, not as results demonstrated in the visible manuscript.
  • Editorial extension: testing the same framework on a standardized distribution test feeder with real weather, load, and cost data would convert the 0.85 resilience score and 0.12 benefit-cost ratio from simulator-specific results into a benchmarkable quantity.
  • Editorial extension: a 0.12 benefit-cost ratio is low enough to raise a market-design question the abstract does not address—who pays for resilience and how investors capture benefits that largely accrue to customers and society; commercialization would require a tariff, insurance, or capacity-market mechanism on top of the learning algorithm.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper as submitted presents an abstract that claims a dual-agent Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) framework for commercializing energy resilience in electrical distribution system planning and operation. The abstract reports an average resilience score of 0.85 ± 0.08 over 10 test episodes, a benefit-cost ratio of 0.12 ± 0.01, and states that the framework creates sustainable market incentives for resilience investment, citing up to 200x reward incentives and 85% of actions selecting configurations with 4 DERs during calamity steps. However, the full text supplied with the manuscript is a completely different paper: a survey on the advantages of co-locating quantum and HPC platforms (appearing to be arXiv:2508.04171). This document contains no description of dual-agent PPO, distribution-system reconfiguration, DERs, the custom simulator, reward design, or any of the empirical results claimed in the abstract. The claimed framework and results are therefore entirely unsupported by the manuscript body.

Significance. If a validated framework of the kind described in the abstract existed—a market-aware, dual-agent RL approach that simultaneously optimizes network reconfiguration and demonstrates economic viability for resilience investment—it could be a relevant contribution to distribution-system planning under extreme events. However, as submitted, no such contribution is present. The full text does not contain the proposed architecture, the mathematical formulation, the simulator, or the experimental methodology. There are no machine-checked proofs, reproducible code, or parameter-free derivations to assess. The abstract's self-reported results cannot be evaluated because the supporting apparatus is absent. The paper, in its current form, does not present a coherent, verifiable scientific claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract vs. full text] The abstract and title describe an agentic-AI framework for energy resilience commercialization, with dual-agent PPO, DER-driven switching, a custom simulator, and results over 10 test episodes. The full text supplied is the survey 'Advantages of Co-locating Quantum-HPC Platforms: A Survey for Near-Future Industrial Applications' (arXiv:2508.04171), and contains no mention of distribution networks, DERs, PPO, calamity events, budget constraints, resilience scores, or benefit-cost analysis. None of the abstract's central claims is supported by any equation, section, or table in the body. This is not a local presentation defect; the manuscript's claimed contribution is absent from the submitted text.
  2. [Abstract, benefit-cost ratio] The abstract's claim that a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of 0.12 ± 0.01 'demonstrat[es] sustainable market incentives for resilience investment' is internally inconsistent under the standard definition BCR = PV(benefits)/PV(costs), since a value below 1 indicates benefits are less than costs. No nonstandard accounting basis—such as monetized option value, regulatory subsidies, or a multi-decade benefits horizon—is stated in the abstract or anywhere in the full text, and the full text does not provide the BCR formula used. The economic conclusion therefore either relies on an unstated redefinition or is contradicted by the reported number.
  3. [Abstract, evaluation methodology] The reported headline quantities (0.85 ± 0.08 resilience; 0.12 ± 0.01 BCR) are produced by a 'custom-built dynamic simulation environment' over only 10 test episodes, with no baseline, no ablation, no comparison to existing reconfiguration methods, and no validation of the simulator against a standard test feeder (e.g., IEEE 123-bus) or historical weather/outage data. The abstract provides no information about the distribution of outcomes, confidence intervals, or statistical significance. Without such evidence, both numbers are uninterpretable as evidence about real-world resilience commercialization. This is a load-bearing gap because the abstract's central claims rest entirely on these simulator-based figures.
  4. [Abstract, reward-shaping circularity] The abstract itself states that the 85% share of actions selecting configurations with 4 DERs is obtained 'with up to 200x reward incentives.' This makes the headline action statistic a direct consequence of the chosen reward scaling rather than an emergent market-equilibrium outcome. If the 200x multiplier also enters the benefit numerator of the reported BCR—as the abstract's wording suggests a connection—then the BCR is a reward-shaping artifact rather than a measure of economic profitability. The manuscript offers no decomposition separating the incentive effect from a genuine economic benefit, so the claimed 'sustainable market incentives' cannot be accepted as demonstrated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title and metadata] The title and abstract describe an energy-resilience paper, while the full text has a different title and appears to be from another arXiv identifier. This suggests a manuscript assembly or upload error. The correct full text must be provided.
  2. [Abstract formatting] The notation '0.85 0.08' and '0.12 0.01' should be written as '0.85 ± 0.08' and '0.12 ± 0.01'. Additionally, the measure of spread (standard deviation, standard error, or range) is unspecified.
  3. [Abstract, incomplete sentence] The abstract ends with 'This framework creates sustainable market incentives' without a period or continuation. The sentence appears truncated.
  4. [References] The full text's references are entirely in the quantum-computing domain and do not support the claimed energy-resilience literature review, PPO methodology, or distribution-system reconfiguration background. No references support the dual-agent framework or the reported results.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity established from the abstract; the supplied full text belongs to a different arXiv paper.

full rationale

The only in-scope text for arXiv:2508.04170 is the abstract; the attached full text corresponds to arXiv:2508.04171 (a quantum-HPC survey), so derivation-level checks cannot be performed beyond the abstract. On the abstract alone, there is no self-citation, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no equation that defines a claimed output in terms of an input. The statement 'with up to 200x reward incentives, resulting in 85% of actions during calamity steps selecting configurations with 4 DERs' is an explicit causal description of reward-shaping, not a hidden reduction: the action share is reported as a consequence of the reward design, not as an independent prediction. The benefit-cost ratio of 0.12 is an output metric; its inconsistency with the phrase 'sustainable market incentives' under standard BCR semantics is a correctness/interpretation issue, not circularity. Without equations or a fitted-vs-predicted link, no circular step can be exhibited per the hard rules.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

All externally load-bearing quantities come from the authors' own construction: the reward scalings (up to 200x), the composite resilience metric, the calamity-event model, and the benefit-cost accounting are all internal to the paper's custom simulator and are not validated against any external benchmark, standard test feeder, or released artifact.

free parameters (5)
  • Reward scaling incentive factors (up to 200x) = up to 200x (per abstract)
    The abstract credits up to 200x reward incentives for the emergence of 4-DER configurations; this scaling is chosen by the authors and directly shapes the reported 85% action statistic.
  • Resilience score component weights (load recovery speed, robustness, customer satisfaction) = not given
    The composite resilience score mixes load recovery speed, system robustness, and customer satisfaction; the weights and normalization are not specified in the abstract and are presumably authored choices.
  • Target DER configuration size (4 DERs) = 4 DERs
    The headline emergent behavior is 85% of actions during calamity steps selecting configurations with 4 DERs; the grid's DER availability and the 4-DER target are environment parameters set by the authors.
  • Simulator parameters (calamity event distribution, budget limits, weather constraints) = not given
    Stochastic calamity events and budget limits are core to the environment but their distributions and values are unspecified in the abstract.
  • Benefit-cost accounting basis = 0.12 (BCR)
    The BCR's numerator and denominator definitions are absent; without them a 0.12 ratio cannot be interpreted as sustainable market incentives.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math PPO is a suitable and convergent learning algorithm for this sequential decision problem.
    PPO is treated as a standard off-the-shelf RL method; convergence and hyperparameter adequacy are assumed.
  • domain assumption The custom simulation environment faithfully models stochastic calamity events, recovery dynamics, and resilience-cost trade-offs.
    Stated in the abstract as a custom-built dynamic simulation environment; no validation against real feeders or standard test systems is reported.
  • ad hoc to paper The reward components (load recovery speed, system robustness, customer satisfaction) together capture genuine resilience and market profitability.
    The reward is authored for this paper; its mapping to real economic value is asserted, not derived.
  • domain assumption DER-driven switching configurations are the adequate control space for resilience enhancement.
    The strategic agent chooses among DER-driven switching configurations; other levers (load shedding, storage dispatch, topology beyond switches) are excluded without justification.
invented entities (2)
  • Custom-built dynamic simulation environment
    purpose: Generates stochastic calamity events and provides the testbed for all reported scores (resilience, BCR, action statistics).
    Not described in the available material, not released, and not validated against any real or benchmark network; all headline numbers live inside it.
  • Composite resilience score (0.85)
    purpose: Headline performance metric aggregating load recovery speed, robustness, and customer satisfaction.
    Definition, scale, and weights are not given in the abstract; the metric is co-designed with the reward it evaluates, so it is not an external benchmark.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Agentic-AI based Mathematical Framework for Commercialization of Energy Resilience in Electrical Distribution System Planning and Operation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O3K5KMCA

@misc{pith2026250804170,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Agentic-AI based Mathematical Framework for Commercialization of Energy Resilience in Electrical Distribution System Planning and Operation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O3K5KMCA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.04170}
}
read the original abstract

The increasing vulnerability of electrical distribution systems to extreme weather events and cyber threats necessitates the development of economically viable frameworks for resilience enhancement. While existing approaches focus primarily on technical resilience metrics and enhancement strategies, there remains a significant gap in establishing market-driven mechanisms that can effectively commercialize resilience features while optimizing their deployment through intelligent decision-making. Moreover, traditional optimization approaches for distribution network reconfiguration often fail to dynamically adapt to both normal and emergency conditions. This paper introduces a novel framework integrating dual-agent Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) with market-based mechanisms, achieving an average resilience score of 0.85 0.08 over 10 test episodes. The proposed architecture leverages a dual-agent PPO scheme, where a strategic agent selects optimal DER-driven switching configurations, while a tactical agent fine-tunes individual switch states and grid preferences under budget and weather constraints. These agents interact within a custom-built dynamic simulation environment that models stochastic calamity events, budget limits, and resilience-cost trade-offs. A comprehensive reward function is designed that balances resilience enhancement objectives with market profitability (with up to 200x reward incentives, resulting in 85% of actions during calamity steps selecting configurations with 4 DERs), incorporating factors such as load recovery speed, system robustness, and customer satisfaction. Over 10 test episodes, the framework achieved a benefit-cost ratio of 0.12 0.01, demonstrating sustainable market incentives for resilience investment. This framework creates sustainable market incentives

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Remotely Located Configurations When quantum computers are co-located with conven- tional computers, communication typically occurs via a LAN

    Bandwidth in Co-located vs. Remotely Located Configurations When quantum computers are co-located with conven- tional computers, communication typically occurs via a LAN. In contrast, when they are remotely located, they rely on a W AN. In co-located scenarios, high-bandwidth data commu- nication can be achieved using specialized networking technologies s...

  2. [2]

    The original through- put model equation (1) has a key parameter, denoted by �

    Impact of Data Transmission Time on Throughput Before discussing the increase in data volumes, it is es- sential to revisit and refine the analysis presented in Sub- section III A to consider scenarios in which data transmis- sion time is no longer negligible. The original through- put model equation (1) has a key parameter, denoted by �. As defined in th...

  3. [3]

    Here, we examine whether the num- ber of shots might exceed the initially assumed value of

    Case Study: Number of Shots Our model-based analysis confirmed that increasing the number of shots contributes to the increase in the latency threshold, potentially reducing the overall bene- fit of lower latency. Here, we examine whether the num- ber of shots might exceed the initially assumed value of

  4. [4]

    Because actual measurements of latency and throughput in such environments were not available, our evaluation relied on theoretical modeling and scenario-based analyses

    Conclusion We have investigated how co-locating quantum and conventional computers can benefit hybrid jobs by reduc- ing latency and thus improving job throughput. Because actual measurements of latency and throughput in such environments were not available, our evaluation relied on theoretical modeling and scenario-based analyses. Our model-based analysi...

  5. [5]

    Bharti, A

    K. Bharti, A. Cervera-Lierta, T. H. Kyaw, T. Haug, S. Alperin-Lea, A. Anand, M. Degroote, H. Heimonen, J. S. Kottmann, T. Menke, et al. , Noisy intermediate- scale quantum algorithms, Reviews of Modern Physics �� , 015004 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Data Volumes for Error Mitigation To better understand the potential volume of measure- ment data when applying error mitigation, we review general theoretical results and specific empirical cases. As a general consideration, universal cost bounds for existing error mitigation techniques indicate that the number of shots required to achieve a certain comp...

  7. [7]

    queueing time

    Conclusion We have investigated the advantages of co-locating quantum and conventional computers from the viewpoint of enhanced bandwidth capabilities. Specifically, we fo- cused on the necessity of error mitigation techniques in the NISQ era and highlighted the potentially significant increase in data volume associated with these methods. Through the ref...

  8. [8]

    We then discuss how these queueing delays affect the total execution time of a quan- tum-classical hybrid job

    Analysis of Queueing Times We examine queueing times typically observed in quan- tum computing job queues. We then discuss how these queueing delays affect the total execution time of a quan- tum-classical hybrid job. In Reference [55], the authors analyzed queueing times for quantum computing jobs executed on the IBM Quan- tum platform over two years up ...

    2021

Show all 94 references
  1. [9]

    Such priori- ty-based scheduling mechanisms are already available on quantum computing platforms from IBM, A WS, and Os- aka University (see Table III)

    Priority-based Scheduling One potential approach to efficiently execute hybrid jobs is to assign higher priority to the quantum com- puting jobs originating from hybrid jobs. Such priori- ty-based scheduling mechanisms are already available on quantum computing platforms from ...

  2. [10]

    quantum multi- programming

    Parallel Execution Strategy Parallel execution of multiple quantum computing jobs is considered a promising approach to reducing average queueing times and enhancing overall platform through- put [54]. Osaka University’s quantum computing cloud service recently introduced the ...

  3. [11]

    Quantum-Centric Supercomputing

    Conclusion We have examined the hypothesis that appropriate job scheduling strategies can effectively mitigate queueing time issues inherent in quantum-classical hybrid jobs. A detailed analysis of job execution data and our scenario-based analysis indicate that queueing time ...

  4. [12]

    QSCI is a novel hybrid algorithm designed for calculating ground-state and excited-state molecular energies

    Case Study: Quantum Chemistry In quantum chemistry, Quantum-Selected Configura- tion Interaction (QSCI) [62] serves as a prime example of a hybrid algorithm in which classical-side computing plays a significant role. QSCI is a novel hybrid algorithm designed for calculating gr...

  5. [13]

    Specifically, pre-training tensor networks on conventional computers can be used to initialize PQC parameters

    Case Study: Quantum Machine Learning In quantum machine learning, Reference [64] suggests a synergy between conventional and quantum comput- ing resources, through interconvertibility of tensor net- works and Parametrized Quantum Circuit (PQC) rep- resentations. Specifically, ...

  6. [14]

    Conclusion We have examined the advantages of employ- ing HPC as the conventional computing resources in quantum-classical hybrid job workflows, in- cluding pre-processing, algorithms execution, and post-processing stages. We identified case studies that enhance quantum chem- ...

  7. [15]

    Conventional Computing Resource Requirements As discussed in Subsection III B, increasing the number of qubits and circuit depth leads to an exponential growth in the measurement data required for effective error mit- igation [42, 43]. We denote the size of this measurement da...

  8. [16]

    We reviewed the existing literature that explicitly measures conventional computing resource usage, such as processing time and hardware specifications

    Case Study: Computing Resources for Error Mitigation Having established the general trend in conventional computing resource demands for error mitigation, we now investigate a specific case study to better understand the current scale of resources required. We reviewed the exi...

  9. [17]

    In a case study, post-processing was performed on sin- gle GPU, which proved sufficient for the current work- loads without incurring prohibitively long processing times

    Conclusion We have assessed the necessity of HPC resources for classical post-processing in error mitigation techniques. In a case study, post-processing was performed on sin- gle GPU, which proved sufficient for the current work- loads without incurring prohibitively long pro...

  10. [18]

    Case Study: Circuit Partitioning We examined empirical studies of quantum circuit par- titioning, focusing on two prominent techniques: quan- tum circuit cutting and quantum circuit knitting. Quantum circuit cutting is based on a so-called wire-cut technique, where quantum cir...

  11. [19]

    To mitigate this degradation, quantum circuit optimiza- tion techniques aim to minimize the number of two-qubit gates while preserving the logical equivalence

    Case Study: Circuit Optimization When executing quantum circuits on quantum hard- ware, a large number of error-prone two-qubit gates(e.g., CNOT gates) can degrade overall computational fidelity. To mitigate this degradation, quantum circuit optimiza- tion techniques aim to mi...

  12. [20]

    Quantum-Centric Su- percomputing,

    Conclusion We have evaluated the potential necessity of HPC re- sources for classical processing tasks in quantum circuit partitioning and optimization. In quantum circuit partitioning, we primarily fo- cused on techniques such as cutting and knitting. Both techniques necessit...

  13. [21]

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

    2010

  14. [22]

    Montanaro, Quantum algorithms: an overview, npj Quantum Information �, 1 (2016)

    A. Montanaro, Quantum algorithms: an overview, npj Quantum Information �, 1 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum �, 79 (2018)

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum �, 79 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Cerezo, A

    M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, 18 S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio, et al., Variational quantum algorithms, Nature Reviews Physics �, 625 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Bravyi, G

    S. Bravyi, G. Smith, and J. A. Smolin, Trading classical and quantum computational resources, Physical Review X �, 021043 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    Schneider and I

    J. Schneider and I. Smalley, What is quantum- centric supercomputing?, �������������������������� ������������������������������������� (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Alexeev, M

    Y. Alexeev, M. Amsler, M. A. Barroca, S. Bassini, T. Battelle, D. Camps, D. Casanova, Y. J. Choi, F. T. Chong, C. Chung, et al., Quantum-centric supercomput- ing for materials science: A perspective on challenges and future directions, Future Generation Computer Systems ��� , ...

    2024

  20. [28]

    CESGA, Quantum computer of 32 qubits for the CESGA, ����������������������������������� �������������������������������������� (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Cleveland Clinic, Quantum computing debuts at Cleve- land Clinic, �������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������� (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    RIKEN, Project for integrated use of quantum computers and supercomputers, ����������������������������� ������������������������������������ (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    JHPC-quantum, Research and development of quantum-supercomputers hybrid platform for ex- ploration of uncharted computable capabilities, ���������������������������������� (Accessed: 2025/5/2)

    2025

  24. [32]

    National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Reinforcing collaboration for in- dustrialization of quantum technology through MOU between AIST and QuEra, ����������������������� ������������������������������������� (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    High-Performance Computer and Quantum Simula- tor hybrid (HPCQS), HPCQS receives second 100+ qubit quantum processor unit from Pasqal, ������ ���������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������� (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    University of Innsbruck, Supercomputer and quan- tum computer in harmony, �������������������� ���������������������������������������������� �������������������� (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    IT4Innovations National Supercomputing Center, Europe takes a quantum leap: LUMI-Q consortium signs contract to establish quantum computer in the Czech Republic, ����������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������...

    2024

  28. [36]

    Forschungszentrum J¨ ulich, Expansion of J¨ ulich’s quantum computer infrastructure, ��������������� ���������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������ �������������� (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    IQM Quantum Computers, Germany launches its first hybrid quantum computer at Leibniz Supercomput- ing Centre, ����������������������������������� ������������������������������������������ ������������������������������������������ (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    Quantum Brilliance, Quantum Brilliance announces strategic collaboration with Oak Ridge National Lab- oratory, ������������������������������������ ����������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������� ���������� (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center, PSNC and ORCA computing announce collabo- ration with NVIDIA to accelerate the develop- ment of hybrid quantum classical high-performance computing, ���������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� ��...

    2024

  32. [40]

    European High-Performance Computing Joint Un- dertaking (EuroHPC JU), Signature of the procure- ment contract for Lucy, a new EuroHPC quantum computer located in France, ���������������� �������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������ ��...

    2024

  33. [41]

    European High-Performance Computing Joint Under- taking (EuroHPC JU), Signature of the procurement contract for the EuroHPC quantum computer located in Italy, ��������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������� ��������������������������� (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    Pawsey Supercomputing Research Centre, Pawsey and Quantum Brilliance advance quantum integration with novel hybrid workflow accelerated by NVIDIA, ����������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������� (2025)

    2025

  35. [43]

    K. A. Britt and T. S. Humble, High-performance com- puting with quantum processing units, ACM Journal on Emerging Technologies in Computing Systems (JETC) �� , 1 (2017)

    2017

  36. [44]

    Z. Cai, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, W. J. Hug- gins, Y. Li, J. R. McClean, and T. E. O’Brien, Quantum error mitigation, Reviews of Modern Physics �� , 045005 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Science Information NETwork SINET6, About SINET, ���������������������������������������� (Ac- cessed: 2025/2/21)

    2025

  38. [46]

    T. Peng, A. W. Harrow, M. Ozols, and X. Wu, Simulating large quantum circuits on a small quantum computer, Physical review letters ��� , 150504 (2020)

    2020

  39. [47]

    Y. Ge, W. Wenjie, C. Yuheng, P. Kaisen, L. Xudong, Z. Zixiang, W. Yuhan, W. Ruocheng, and Y. Junchi, Quantum circuit synthesis and compilation opti- mization: Overview and prospects, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00736 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Peruzzo, J

    A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O’brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nature communications �, 4213 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    Mitarai, M

    K. Mitarai, M. Negoro, M. Kitagawa, and K. Fujii, Quantum circuit learning, Physical Review A �� , 032309 (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    Farhi and H

    E. Farhi and H. Neven, Classification with quantum neu- ral networks on near term processors, arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.06002 (2018). 19

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    M. N. Farooqi and M. Ruefenacht, Exploring hybrid classical-quantum compute systems through simulation, in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) , Vol. 2 (IEEE, 2023) pp. 127–133

    2023

  44. [52]

    FS Blog, RoCE technology in high-performance com- puting: Insights and applications, ��������������� �������������������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� (Accessed: 2025/2/21)

    2025

  45. [53]

    Mih´ alikov´ a, M

    I. Mih´ alikov´ a, M. Pivoluska, M. Plesch, M. Fri´ ak, D. Na- gaj, and M. ˇSob, The cost of improving the precision of the variational quantum eigensolver for quantum chem- istry, Nanomaterials �� , 243 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    L. Zhu, S. Liang, C. Yang, and X. Li, Optimizing shot assignment in variational quantum eigensolver measure- ment, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation �� , 2390 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    Delgado and K

    A. Delgado and K. E. Hamilton, Unsupervised quantum circuit learning in high energy physics, Physical Review D ��� , 096006 (2022)

    2022

  48. [56]

    Miroszewski, M

    A. Miroszewski, M. F. Asiani, J. Mielczarek, B. L. Saux, and J. Nalepa, In search of quantum advantage: Esti- mating the number of shots in quantum kernel methods, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15776 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Huang, M

    H.-Y. Huang, M. Broughton, M. Mohseni, R. Babbush, S. Boixo, H. Neven, and J. R. McClean, Power of data in quantum machine learning, Nature communications �� , 2631 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    K¨ ubler, S

    J. K¨ ubler, S. Buchholz, and B. Sch¨ olkopf, The inductive bias of quantum kernels, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems �� , 12661 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    Thanasilp, S

    S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, M. Cerezo, and Z. Holmes, Expo- nential concentration in quantum kernel methods, Nature communications �� , 5200 (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    IBM Corp., IBM Quantum Documentation: Job limits, ���������������������������������������������� (Accessed: 2025/2/21)

    2025

  53. [61]

    100 bits � 1000 shots = 12,500 bytes

    Assuming that NISQ computers possess between 100 and 1000 qubits, we estimated the data volume of bit strings generated by 1000 shots. 100 bits � 1000 shots = 12,500 bytes. 1000 bits � 1000 shots = 125,000 bytes

  54. [62]

    Takagi, H

    R. Takagi, H. Tajima, and M. Gu, Universal sampling lower bounds for quantum error mitigation, Physical Re- view Letters ��� , 210602 (2023)

    2023

  55. [63]

    Tsubouchi, T

    K. Tsubouchi, T. Sagawa, and N. Yoshioka, Universal cost bound of quantum error mitigation based on quan- tum estimation theory, Physical Review Letters ��� , 210601 (2023)

    2023

  56. [64]

    Lu, M.-C

    P.-J. Lu, M.-C. Lai, and J.-S. Chang, A survey of high-performance interconnection networks in high- performance computer systems, Electronics �� , 1369 (2022)

    2022

  57. [65]

    W. Tang, T. Tomesh, M. Suchara, J. Larson, and M. Martonosi, CutQC: using small quantum comput- ers for large quantum circuit evaluations, in Proceedings of the 26th ACM International conference on architec- tural support for programming languages and operating systems (2021) ...

    2021

  58. [66]

    L. L. Peterson and B. S. Davie, Computer Networks: A Systems Approach (Elsevier, 2012)

    2012

  59. [67]

    Li and S

    Y. Li and S. C. Benjamin, Efficient variational quantum simulator incorporating active error minimization, Phys- ical Review X �, 021050 (2017)

    2017

  60. [68]

    Temme, S

    K. Temme, S. Bravyi, and J. M. Gambetta, Error miti- gation for short-depth quantum circuits, Physical review letters ��� , 180509 (2017)

    2017

  61. [69]

    Y. Kim, C. J. Wood, T. J. Yoder, S. T. Merkel, J. M. Gambetta, K. Temme, and A. Kandala, Scalable error mitigation for noisy quantum circuits produces competi- tive expectation values, Nature Physics �� , 752 (2023)

    2023

  62. [70]

    P. D. Nation, H. Kang, N. Sundaresan, and J. M. Gambetta, Scalable mitigation of measurement errors on quantum computers, PRX Quantum �, 040326 (2021)

    2021

  63. [71]

    Pokharel, S

    B. Pokharel, S. Srinivasan, G. Quiroz, and B. Boots, Scal- able measurement error mitigation via iterative bayesian unfolding, Physical Review Research �, 013187 (2024)

    2024

  64. [72]

    Bravyi, S

    S. Bravyi, S. Sheldon, A. Kandala, D. C. Mckay, and J. M. Gambetta, Mitigating measurement errors in mul- tiqubit experiments, Physical Review A ��� , 042605 (2021)

    2021

  65. [73]

    Weaving, A

    T. Weaving, A. Ralli, W. M. Kirby, P. J. Love, S. Succi, and P. V. Coveney, Benchmarking noisy intermediate scale quantum error mitigation strategies for ground state preparation of the HCl molecule, Physical Review Research �, 043054 (2023)

    2023

  66. [74]

    P. Das, S. S. Tannu, P. J. Nair, and M. Qureshi, A case for multi-programming quantum computers, in Proceed- ings of the 52nd Annual IEEE/ACM International Sym- posium on Microarchitecture (2019) pp. 291–303

    2019

  67. [75]

    G. S. Ravi, K. N. Smith, P. Gokhale, and F. T. Chong, Quantum computing in the cloud: Analyzing job and ma- chine characteristics, in 2021 IEEE International Sym- posium on Workload Characterization (IISWC) (IEEE,

    2021

  68. [76]

    IBM Corp., IBM Quantum Documentation: Introduc- tion to Qiskit Runtime execution modes, ������������� �������������������������������������� (Accessed: 2025/5/2)

    2025

  69. [77]

    Amazon Web Services, Inc., Amazon Braket Developer Guide: What is a hybrid job?, ����������������� ����������������������������������������������� ����������������������� (Accessed: 2025/2/21)

    2025

  70. [78]

    T. Mori, [Accelerating cooperative processing of quan- tum and classical computations! Now available on Osaka University’s quantum computing cloud service] Ry¯ oshi Keisan to Koten Keisan no Ky¯ och¯ o Shori o K¯ osokuka! Handai no Ry¯ oshi Konpy¯ uta Kuraudo S¯ abisu de Teiky...

    2024

  71. [79]

    T. Mori, [Accelerating quantum programs through par- allel execution! Now available on Osaka Univer- sity’s quantum computing cloud service] Ry¯ oshi Purogu- ramu o Heiretsu Jikk¯ o shite K¯ osokuka! Handai no Ry¯ oshi Konpy¯ uta Kuraudo S¯ abisu de Teiky¯ o Kaishi (in japanes...

    2024

  72. [80]

    Romero-Alvarez, J

    J. Romero-Alvarez, J. Alvarado-Valiente, J. Casco-Seco, E. Moguel, J. Garcia-Alonso, J. Berrocal, and J. M. Murillo, Quantum circuit scheduler for QPUs usage op- timization, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.01055 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  73. [81]

    W. Wu, Y. Wang, G. Yan, Y. Zhao, B. Zhang, and J. Yan, On reducing the execution latency of superconducting quantum processors via quantum job scheduling, in Pro- ceedings of the 43rd IEEE/ACM International Confer- ence on Computer-Aided Design (2025) pp. 1–9

    2025

  74. [82]

    Kanno, M

    K. Kanno, M. Kohda, R. Imai, S. Koh, K. Mitarai, W. Mizukami, and Y. O. Nakagawa, Quantum-selected configuration interaction: Classical diagonalization of hamiltonians in subspaces selected by quantum comput- ers, arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11320 (2023). 20

    2023 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Robledo-Moreno, M

    J. Robledo-Moreno, M. Motta, H. Haas, A. Javadi- Abhari, P. Jurcevic, W. Kirby, S. Martiel, K. Sharma, S. Sharma, T. Shirakawa, et al. , Chemistry beyond the scale of exact diagonalization on a quantum-centric su- percomputer, Science Advances �� , eadu9991 (2025)

    2025

  76. [84]

    M. S. Rudolph, J. Miller, D. Motlagh, J. Chen, A. Acharya, and A. Perdomo-Ortiz, Synergistic pretrain- ing of parametrized quantum circuits via tensor net- works, Nature Communications �� , 8367 (2023)

    2023

  77. [86]

    Tang and M

    W. Tang and M. Martonosi, Cutting quantum circuits to run on quantum and classical platforms, arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.05836 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  78. [87]

    Boixo, S

    S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, N. Ding, Z. Jiang, M. J. Bremner, J. M. Martinis, and H. Neven, Characterizing quantum supremacy in near- term devices, Nature Physics �� , 595 (2018)

    2018

  79. [88]

    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, Nature ��� , 505 (2019)

    2019

  80. [89]

    Piveteau and D

    C. Piveteau and D. Sutter, Circuit knitting with classi- cal communication, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory �� , 2734 (2024)

    2024

  81. [90]

    X. Ren, M. Zhang, and A. Barbalace, A hardware-aware gate cutting framework for practical quantum circuit knitting, in Proceedings of the 43rd IEEE/ACM Inter- national Conference on Computer-Aided Design (2025) pp. 1–9

    2025

  82. [91]

    Schneider, L

    S. Schneider, L. Burgholzer, and R. Wille, A SAT encod- ing for optimal Clifford circuit synthesis, in Proceedings of the 28th Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference (2023) pp. 190–195

    2023

  83. [92]

    Aaronson and D

    S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecu- lar, and Optical Physics �� , 052328 (2004)

    2004

  84. [93]

    Bravyi, R

    S. Bravyi, R. Shaydulin, S. Hu, and D. Maslov, Clifford circuit optimization with templates and symbolic Pauli gates, Quantum �, 580 (2021)

    2021

  85. [94]

    Peham, N

    T. Peham, N. Brandl, R. Kueng, R. Wille, and L. Burgholzer, Depth-optimal synthesis of Clifford cir- cuits with SAT solvers, in 2023 IEEE International Con- ference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), Vol. 1 (IEEE, 2023) pp. 802–813

    2023

  86. [1000]

    Variance-Preserved Shot Reduction

    To do so, we reviewed research from both quantum chemistry and quantum machine learning that discusses variations in the number of shots. As an example from quantum chemistry, Reference [33] focused on how varying the number of shots in a single iteration of the VQE affected c...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.