← Atlas

Algorithms · Quantum benchmarking protocol

Quantum volume from randomized model circuits

Measure, as a single number, how large a random circuit of equal width and depth a given quantum computer successfully implements, so that progress toward improved system-wide gate error rates can be measured and compared across near-term devices.

Attested & literatureUpdated

Open on the mapView frozen graph

  • Record typeLiterature reference
  • Reference implementationquantum_volume
  • Reported costNot stated by the sources read
  • Papers1
TakesNothingWhat joins here

No input port at this edge: the record publishes no gate sequence and no register, so there is nothing here to read one off — and unlike a declared hole, nothing has been recorded about what belongs here.

Nothing in the Atlas meets this end.

ReturnsNothingWhat joins here

No output port at this edge: the record publishes no gate sequence and no register, so there is nothing here to read one off — and unlike a declared hole, nothing has been recorded about what belongs here.

Nothing in the Atlas meets this end.

This record publishes no gate sequence and no register, so there is nothing here to read an interface off. Absent rather than empty. See all 152 →

References

  • Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits

    Andrew W. Cross, Lev S. Bishop, Sarah Sheldon, Paul D. Nation, Jay M. Gambetta · 2018

    Primary source: it introduces the quantum volume metric, states that it can be measured by a concrete protocol on near-term computers of modest size (n ≲ 50), defines it as the largest random circuit of equal width and depth the computer successfully implements, links it to system error rates, and reports measured values as high as 16 on several state-of-the-art transmon devices. Consult it for the protocol itself — the model circuits, the success criterion, the number of circuits and the confidence level — none of which the abstract states.

Attested & literature
  • Peer-reviewed paper
Method
Curation only. This record documents the algorithm a published reference implementation demonstrates, not the demonstration itself: nothing in Leona runs Qmod. The primary reference's title, authors and submission year were read from its arXiv abs page, and the complexity claim taken from a clause of that paper's abstract (The abstract of arXiv:1811.12926 states no cost, running time or speedup bound, and correctly so: quantum volume is a figure of merit for a device, not an algorithm with a complexity. What it states instead is a definition — "It quantifies the largest random circuit of equal width and depth that the computer successfully implements" — and a measurement, quoted here in two pieces: "We introduce a single-number metric, quantum volume, that can be measured using a concrete protocol on near-term quantum computers of modest size" and "and measure it on several state-of-the-art transmon devices, finding values as high as 16." Both pieces are verbatim; what falls between them is the size regime, which the abstract writes as TeX and which this record renders in Unicode as n ≲ 50, so it is stated outside the quotation marks rather than inside them. The demonstration this record covers states no complexity bound of its own. Those are the only sources read for this field, and the complexity field is left empty on purpose rather than filled with a bound written from memory.). No circuit was constructed, simulated or run.
Result
Pass · the record's problem statement and primary reference agree with the sources named above.
Caveat
This record documents the protocol a published reference implementation demonstrates. It does not reproduce that demonstration: nothing in Leona runs Qmod, and the record carries no detail about what that implementation's files contain. Nothing was measured for this record either — no circuit was built, compiled, simulated or executed, no device was benchmarked, and no quantum volume was computed for anything, including for any circuit in this catalog. The values as high as 16 are the authors' own measurement, reported in 2018 on several state-of-the-art transmon devices and carried here as the paper's claim: this record did not repeat that measurement, did not read the data behind it, and says nothing about any machine available now or about any measurement made since. The abstract names a concrete protocol but does not state it, so this record carries no success criterion, no circuit count, no confidence level, and no definition of when a circuit counts as successfully implemented; those are in the paper, not here. The stated regime is near-term computers of modest size, n ≲ 50, and nothing here extends the metric beyond it. The list of properties expected to come with higher quantum volumes is the authors' expectation, and the reduction by uncontrolled interactions is described as empirical, so neither is a proved relation. Finally, a device metric is not an algorithm result: nothing here says what any algorithm costs on a machine of a given quantum volume, what such a machine makes feasible, or how the number relates to error-corrected performance; the abstract mentions error-correction experiments only as one of the settings the improved gate error rates it speaks of are for.
Validating quantum computers using randomized model circuits ↗
Kind
curated reference
Reviewed by
Leona Quantum curation pass
License
Citation metadata only; source publication terms apply
quantum volumebenchmarkingrandom circuitsdevice metrictransmon

Atlas stars stay in the public catalog. Saving this entry to your workspace starts an unstarred private copy.