About this map
Sections
What this is
Quantum algorithms are not written from scratch. They are assembled from a small number of reusable steps, and almost every published method is a different route through the same handful of them.
This is a map of those routes. Circles are the things an algorithm can be holding. Lines are the steps that carry you from one to the next. A method is a path across.
Nothing here is generated. Every line was read out of a paper and checked against it.
How to read it
- Something you can hold — a state, a matrix, a circuit, an answer.
- The same, in the middle of a step you have opened.
- A step. Someone has published a way through it.
- A step whose way through has not been pinned to one method.
- A step nothing published fills yet.
- A step you have opened. What is drawn inside it is how it was done.
- There is a record in the repository for this one.
How to move around
- Two fingers move the map. Pinch to zoom, or hold ctrl and scroll.
- Click a step to open it in place — everything else stays where it is.
- Click a name to read the full record without leaving the map.
- Arrow keys move, plus and minus zoom, zero puts it back.
What a line is claiming
A solid line means a paper puts those two steps together and we have the citation. A long-dashed line means the route is recorded but no single method has been named for that step. A short-dashed line means nothing published fills it — the step is real, the way through is not written yet.
A count after a step's name — ×T/h, ×O(κ) — means the route walks that step that many times rather than once. It is the source's own symbol, and the card says what it stands for and what one turn costs. A step with no count is a step no source we read said is repeated, which is not the same as one taken once.
A line drawn nested under another, on the soft shaded band behind it, is a narrower version of the line above it: the same construction, re-analysed or re-tuned, filling the same step. It is why two lines can draw the identical interior and still be two entries. Lines outside the band are alternatives to their neighbours, not versions of them.
The map does not hide the gaps. An empty step is drawn as an empty step.
What is not here yet
The map covers the algorithm literature. The repository covers circuits and primitives. They overlap less than you would expect, and where a method has no record we say so on its page rather than leaving the space blank.
Where something named here does have a record, its name links straight to it.
Method
Readout (measurement) error mitigation
Correct the classical readout channel by deconvolving the assignment matrix that maps true bitstrings to observed ones. The naive form calibrates and inverts the full matrix; the scalable form never forms it.
Open the full recordFills the slot: Recover a noiseless expectation value by post-processing
Addresses readout error only — it does nothing about gate or decoherence error, and treating it as general-purpose mitigation is a category error. The approach Nation et al. displace forms the full assignment matrix and inverts it, which needs calibration circuits and a inverse and can return unphysical negative probabilities; their method never forms it. The scalable method works in the subspace defined by the observed bitstrings, accommodates correlated as well as uncorrelated errors, and yields computable error bounds.
A circuit, a target observable, a noisy device, a shot budget, and — for the model-based methods — a learned characterization of the device noise.
Noisy expectation value → Bias-reduced expectation valueinvert the assignment matrix on the counts
The noisy and true outcome distributions are linearly related, , where is the probability the readout process reports when the true outcome is . assumption: readout error is fully captured by this stochastic relabeling of classical bit-strings, i.e. every POVM element is diagonal in the standard basis Correction applies before averaging: is an unbiased estimator of , with overhead setting shots for precision . Rather than build , the scalable route restricts the system to bit-strings present in , renormalizes those columns of into , and solves by a Jacobi-preconditioned Krylov iteration; finite sampling can leave components of negative, a quasi-probability rather than a true probability vector, adequate for expectation values but needing a slower bounded least-squares solve if itself must be non-negative. approximation: for small error rates and enough circuit samples, the true outcome's support is assumed to already lie inside the observed noisy support, since errors predominantly move probability to bit-strings a short Hamming distance away
approximationassumption
A bias-reduced expectation-value estimate, with a variance — equivalently a sampling overhead — that grows with circuit volume.
None found yet.
given the observed counts over the bitstrings the device actually returned
# The form Nation et al. displace, for contrast -- do not build this:
# calibrate the full 2^n x 2^n assignment matrix A, then apply A^-1.
# That needs 2^n calibration circuits and a 2^n x 2^n inverse, and it
# can return unphysical negative probabilities.
# The scalable form never forms A:
restrict to the subspace spanned by the observed bitstrings
build only the entries of A that act within that subspace
solve A_sub p_true = p_observed iteratively, without forming an inverse
return p_true, with its computable error bound
# readout error only. This does nothing about gate or decoherence error, and
# treating it as general-purpose mitigation is a category error.
# correlated as well as uncorrelated errors are accommodatedNation, Kang, Sundaresan and Gambetta report a matrix-free preconditioned iterative solver converging in steps and using orders of magnitude less memory than direct factorization, mitigating in a few seconds at qubit numbers where the direct method is intractable.
None found yet.
None found yet.
CTMP and tensor-product readout mitigation on ibmq_johannesburg
- Mitigating measurement errors in multi-qubit experiments
Sergey Bravyi, Sarah Sheldon, Abhinav Kandala, David C. McKay, Jay M. Gambetta · 2020
About
Bravyi, Sheldon, Kandala, McKay and Gambetta, at IBM Quantum's T. J. Watson and Almaden research centers, correct readout errors by classical post-processing for the class of algorithms in which measurement outcomes are used only to compute mean values of observables; they name variational quantum eigensolvers, quantum machine learning and tomography of entangled states, and state that the techniques are not applicable to single-shot measurements. The premise is that readout errors introduced by imperfect qubit measurements are often the dominant factor limiting scalability of near-term devices. The preprint (arXiv:2006.14044, 2020) was published as Phys. Rev. A 103, 042605 (2021).
Methods
Two classical noise models are calibrated and then inverted. The tensor product (TP) model makes a tensor product of noise matrices and depends on error rates describing single-qubit readout errors and . The correlated model is built from a Continuous Time Markov Process (CTMP): the noise matrix has the form , where is a sum of local operators generating single- and two-qubit readout errors such as and , and it depends on error rates. Calibration prepares standard basis states and measures each repeatedly; three complete input sets are defined, and all three were performed for - weight-1 calibration (all -bit strings of Hamming weight ), weight-2 calibration (Hamming weight ), and a Hadamard calibration in which, for the smallest with , the input set is with defined by for , where are the binary digits of ; each two-bit error is then probed on exactly input states and in general . Rather than forming the inverse noise matrix explicitly, error mitigation cancels errors by sampling noise matrices from a quasi-probability distribution (Algorithm 1), which yields an unbiased estimator of the ideal mean value; the total overhead, in measurements and classical post-processing, scales as in the noise strength .
Data
All experiments were performed on -qubit registers of the 20-qubit IBM Quantum device ibmq_johannesburg, with only the chosen -qubit register calibrated, unused qubits initialized in in each calibration round and their outcomes ignored; every experiment used calibration rounds. The benchmark states were -qubit graph states on a path graph, for , run on -qubit subsets of qubits 0 through 11, plus a 20-qubit entangled state generated by a random depth-4 Clifford circuit of two layers of nearest-neighbour CNOT gates and two layers of single-qubit Clifford operators. The mean value of each stabilizer was estimated by measuring copies of the graph state, fidelity was estimated by averaging the stabilizer mean value over random stabilizers, and the entire experiment (calibration and mean value measurements) was repeated 16 times to estimate error bars.
Code
Bravyi et al. release no code of their own; the introduction points at Qiskit as the then-existing open-source toolkit for calibrating and mitigating readout errors for either a tensor product or a general noise model, cited as prior art alongside the tensor-product model. The CTMP scheme was implemented separately in Qiskit Ignis (Python, Apache License 2.0) by Christopher J. Wood with George S. Barron - PR 500, 'Add expectation value measurement error mitigation', merged 2020-09-23, three months after the preprint, first shipped in Ignis 0.5.0 on 2020-10-15 - as the class `CTMPExpvalMeasMitigator` in `qiskit/ignis/mitigation/expval/ctmp_mitigator.py`, whose sampling routine `_ctmp_inverse` is documented in its own docstring as equivalent to Algorithm 1 in Bravyi et al.; the companion `fit_ctmp_meas_mitigator` in `ctmp_fitter.py` extracts the generator rates from calibration data, and the tensor-product model ships alongside it as `tensored_mitigator.py`. Qiskit Ignis has since been deprecated and its repository, https://github.com/qiskit-community/qiskit-ignis, is archived.
Results
On ibmq_johannesburg - typical mean error rates for CX gates, for single qubit gates and for readout errors - the CTMP model tracked the full assignment matrix more closely than the tensor-product model. Over 16 independent experiments at each of , with both models fitted from weight-2 calibration and given exactly the same calibration data set, CTMP achieved a 2X reduction in the total variation distance to the full -matrix for qubits; across the graph-state fidelities for under weight-1 calibration, the TP model systematically over-estimates the fidelity while CTMP agrees much better with the full -matrix method (the full -matrix model was only used for ). In the chosen 12-qubit register, some pairs of qubits, such as (7, 8), experience correlated errors with a few-percent rate. The measured CTMP noise strength was consistent with a linear scaling , with over the graph-state experiments - an error mitigation overhead of at most , a factor of 20 increase in the number of measurements - and in the experiment. In the 20-qubit random-Clifford experiment, mean values were measured for stabilizers of weight 1 to 20 under Hadamard-type calibration; there the correlated two-qubit error rates and are less than 1% for all pairs of qubits, so the TP and CTMP results differ less. Classical post-processing was cheap: computing the error-mitigated mean value of a 20-qubit stabilizer with samples in Algorithm 1 takes about 2 seconds on a laptop computer, and extracting the CTMP error rates from the 20-qubit calibration data takes about 1 second.
- Mitigating measurement errors in multi-qubit experiments
M3 (Matrix-free Measurement Mitigation)
- Scalable mitigation of measurement errors on quantum computers
Paul D. Nation, Hwajung Kang, Neereja Sundaresan, Jay M. Gambetta · 2021
About
Nation, Kang, Sundaresan and Gambetta at IBM Quantum attack the scaling wall in the full-space approach: current measurement mitigation techniques utilize the full -dimensional probability space, and thus do not scale beyond a handful of qubits. Their stated goal is to reduce the dimensionality of the linear system without the need for computing itself, while still accommodating both uncorrelated and correlated errors and allowing for computing accurate error bounds. They place Bravyi et al. among the quasi-probability approaches that mitigate expectation values rather than distributions, and cite it for the proof that such quasi-probabilities give an unbiased estimate of the expectation value of an operator with spectral radius one that is diagonal in the computational basis.
Methods
is defined to be the assignment matrix over only those bit-strings observed in , so in the worst case its dimension equals the number of times the input circuit is sampled - typically 8192 on IBM Quantum systems - rather than . Individual elements are computed on demand from bit-string values, (Eq. 4), out of single-qubit calibration matrices ; an equivalent expression, Eq. (B1), built from local noise matrices whose elements are obtained following Section V of Bravyi et al., handles pairwise-correlated errors at floating-point evaluations per element instead of . As a corollary of grabbing elements individually, only those within a given Hamming distance need be kept, which varies the sparsity of ; and because only selected elements of are taken, the columns of must be renormalized so that they once again sum to one (Eq. 5). The reduced system is solved either by direct LU factorization of or, where explicitly forming is still prohibitive, by a Jacobi-preconditioned matrix-free Krylov method (GMRES or BiCGSTAB), which requires computing only the product and not itself. The mitigation overhead is , which gives an upper bound on the standard deviation of an observable, at samples; rather than construct , the iterative Hager-Higham algorithm estimates using only linear systems of equations involving and , an estimate that is a lower bound on though in practice often exact or nearly so.
Data
Three hardware runs, with calibration circuits constructed and executed through Qiskit. (i) A 12-qubit circuit with an exact distribution of 43 unique bit-strings and an expectation value of , executed 100 times on the 27 qubit IBM Quantum Kolkata system, mapping the virtual circuit qubits to physical qubits [1, 4, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 11, 8, 5, 3, 2], while varying the number of samples per circuit; calibration used 8192 samples per circuit, and the calibration data and raw input samples were identical for M3 and for the Qiskit Ignis comparison. (ii) GHZ states out to 42 qubits on the 65 qubit IBM Quantum Brooklyn system, prepared starting with a Hadamard gate on qubit 11 and, after the first 6 qubits, increasing the GHZ state by 4 qubits per layer; all calibration data and GHZ circuit execution used 8192 shots per circuit, and the average assignment and CNOT error rates across the qubits used were 2.15% and 1.01% respectively. (iii) An 8 qubit GHZ circuit executed 100 times on IBM Quantum Kolkata, a Falcon 5.11 series system with 330 ns readout pulses, using qubits [8, 5, 3, 2, 1, 4, 7, 6] that span two multiplex readout groupings at 8192 samples per circuit, then re-run with the readout pulse amplitudes intentionally increased by approximately 2x from the optimized values to induce correlated readout errors.
Code
M3, which stands for Matrix-free Measurement Mitigation. The paper's reference for the artefact is the repository https://github.com/qiskit-partners/mthree, which now resolves to https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit-addon-mthree, described there as 'Matrix-free Measurement Mitigation' and licensed Apache-2.0; it is distributed on PyPI as `mthree`, summarised as 'M3: Matrix-free measurement mitigation' under Apache 2.0. The paper states the method is implemented with NumPy, SciPy and Cython, and makes use of Qiskit for calibration circuit construction and execution; the repository's language breakdown is Python, Cython and C.
Results
All timing data was taken on a quad core Intel i3-10100 system with 32 Gb of memory with NumPy and SciPy compiled against OpenBlas. On the 27 qubit IBM Quantum Kolkata system, M3 used at most 371 bit-strings (9% of the full-dimensionality) yet closely matched the full-dimensional tensored results over the entire range of samples, and agreed remarkably well with Qiskit Ignis above the executions typically employed in practice; the sub-space reduction cut run time from s per circuit for Qiskit Ignis to at most ms for M3. The uncertainty bound given by the computed mitigation overhead closely matched the experimental values, and for a tolerance of , was well-approximated by keeping only terms out to . On the 65 qubit IBM Quantum Brooklyn system, GHZ states were mitigated out to 42 qubits, and only M3 allows for mitigating errors beyond 14 qubits; the comparators were the Qiskit Ignis tensored method and a bounded least-squares method the authors had modified to start from rather than a random vector (a 3x or more improvement in runtime), and they failed by algorithmic breakdown and extreme run-times respectively. At 42 qubits M3 took at most 1.2 seconds, rising to 2.4 and 4.5 seconds for the direct and iterative solutions when the mitigation overhead was computed as well. The M3 iterative method uses MiB of storage, against a compressed sparse column representation of the full 42-qubit -matrix truncated at requiring a total of 580.5 PiB, x larger than the 4.85 PiB of memory on the Fugaku supercomputer. In the deliberately degraded 8-qubit Kolkata readout, the correlated M3 method using Eq. (B1) well captures the correlated readout errors, as evident by agreement with the complete -matrix, while the tensored mitigator strongly over-corrects.
- Scalable mitigation of measurement errors on quantum computers
Readout-mitigated VQE · Qiskit
From the repository — run, not written up from a paper · unsupported
About
Calibrated assignment errors are inverted or regularized before Pauli expectations are assembled.
Methods
None found yet.
Data
None found yet.
Code
Qiskit
Results
Literature-backed method record; algorithmic scope and evidence boundary reviewed, with no benchmark run claimed.
- Readout-mitigated VQE
Calibrated assignment errors are inverted or regularized before Pauli expectations are assembled.
References
- Mitigating measurement errors in multi-qubit experiments
Sergey Bravyi, Sarah Sheldon, Abhinav Kandala, David C. McKay, Jay M. Gambetta · 2020
- Scalable mitigation of measurement errors on quantum computers
Paul D. Nation, Hwajung Kang, Neereja Sundaresan, Jay M. Gambetta · 2021
Where the routes meet
11 problems nothing else needs — the places a reader arrives. Open a line to see what is recorded inside it, or click its name to go there.
13 lines have something recorded inside that you have not opened.
Of the routes that have been taken apart, 15 are built entirely from named slots, 15 hand off part of the work and finish the rest themselves, and 20 are one undivided act. None of the three is a defect; they are different things to reuse.
Every line on this figure, in words
The lines on this figure
Solve a nonlinear ODE dy/dt = F(y)
- Embed a nonlinear system into a linear one — opens into 6 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Solve a linear ODE du/dt = A(t)u + b(t) — opens into 9 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Choose a time discretization or propagator approximation → Quantum linear solve — open
- Choose a time discretization or propagator approximation — opens into 6 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Quantum linear solve — opens into 5 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Simulate Hamiltonian evolution → Estimate an observable — open
- Simulate Hamiltonian evolution — opens into 3 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Estimate an observable — opens into 4 · a way across — click it to open it here
Estimate an excited-state energy
- Variational quantum deflation — opens into 3 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Subspace-search variational eigensolver — opens into 3 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Quantum subspace expansion
- Quantum equation of motion
- Folded-spectrum variational eigensolver — opens into 3 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Penalty-constrained variational eigensolver — opens into 3 · a way across — click it to open it here
- Multistate contracted variational eigensolver — opens into 3 · a way across — click it to open it here
Every step you can open
1 of these have an object recorded in the middle; the rest open into the methods that fill them.
- Solve a nonlinear ODE dy/dt = F(y)
- Replace a spatial domain with a finite grid
- Discretize a PDE into one linear system
- Embed a nonlinear system into a linear one
- Solve a linear ODE du/dt = A(t)u + b(t)
- Recast a non-Hermitian generator as Hamiltonian evolution
- Choose a time discretization or propagator approximation
- Quantum linear solve
- Matrix function
- QSP phase factors
- Polynomial approximation
- Block-encode a matrix
- Prepare an input state
- Amplify a success branch
- Simulate Hamiltonian evolution
- Estimate an observable
- Compile a circuit to a specific device
- Satisfy the hardware connectivity constraint
- Approximate a continuous rotation in a discrete gate set
- Recover a noiseless expectation value by post-processing
- Build logical qubits at a target logical error rate
- Estimate a Hamiltonian's ground-state energy
- Choose a parameterised trial state
- Minimise the objective over the parameters
- Estimate an excited-state energy
- Measure what the machine can actually do
- Recover the period of a periodic function
- Estimate the eigenphase of a unitary
- Find the item a check accepts
- Walk a graph to the vertex you want
- Search a cost Hamiltonian for the assignment it minimises
What is on this map, counted
What is here, counted
147 nodes — 31 slots and 116 methods.
76 of the 147 link to a record in the Atlas, between them naming 89 records. The rest name papers and nothing else: this graph describes work the catalogue has not got yet, and the nodes with no record are the list of what a corpus pass has to go and read.
0 slots have no method recorded, and 32 methods have not been taken apart. Both are shown as what they are rather than left blank.
Every claim here rests on a source. This graph cites 140 papers; they and the 172 the Atlas cites alone are registered in one place, with what each reports and everywhere it is cited from. Papers