Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 52 references

Modeling and Simulating Rydberg Atom Quantum Computers for Hardware-Software Co-design with PachinQo

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read PachinQo claims that co-designing a dual-cache zonal Rydberg architecture with a greedy MaxCut compiler makes general quantum algorithms run with 45% higher success probability, 20% less runtime, and 50% fewer SWAPs.

desk verdict PachinQo is a credible first compiler for general algorithms on zonal Rydberg architectures, with a smart dual-cache/MaxCut design, but the headline gains rest on an unvalidated parallel trap-change assumption and the timing ratios in the text don't agree. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.07181 v1 pith:DMPTZQJQ submitted 2024-12-10 quant-ph cs.ET

Jason Zev Ludmir , Yuqian Huo , Nicholas S. DiBrita , Tirthak Patel This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcs.ET
keywords RydbergatomquantumcomputingzonaladdressingcacheMaxCutqubitpartitionhardware-softwareco-designcompilationneutralarchitecturesestimatedsuccessprobability
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

PachinQo is a hardware-software co-design framework for Rydberg atom quantum computers that use zonal addressing, an architecture where a compute zone is illuminated by a Rydberg laser while other qubits wait in memory. The authors claim that this architecture, demonstrated so far only for surface-code-style circuits, can be extended to arbitrary quantum algorithms by changing both the hardware and the compiler together: add a second cache on the opposite side of the compute zone, reuse the readout zone as a cache, and let the compiler partition qubits into static and mobile groups with a greedy MaxCut heuristic, move columns between the two caches, and split SWAPs into per-layer pieces. The payoff, across 13 benchmark circuits of 51 to 1000 qubits, is an average 45% higher estimated probability of success, a 20% shorter circuit runtime, and 50% fewer SWAP gates compared with a degree-based grouping baseline. This matters because zonal addressing is a leading scalable Rydberg design, and the result suggests that its usefulness depends on co-designing the layout of zones with the compiler rather than treating compilation as an add-on.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the zonal addressing layout with a dual quantum cache: a compute zone illuminated by the Rydberg laser, stationary SLM traps inside it, and movable AOD columns that park in either of two caches flanking compute, one of which is also the readout zone. Three mechanisms carry the argument: the greedy MaxCut grouping in Algorithm 1, which maximizes the number of CZ gates whose qubits sit in different device groups; alternating sweep direction and cache side, so AOD columns get balanced access to compute without violating the no-overtaking ordering constraint; and preemptive SWAP decomposition, which spreads a SWAP's three CZ gates and six U3 gates one per layer to keep individual layer runtime short. Together they reduce crosstalk, movement, and serial trap changes.

What would settle it

Run a locally structured circuit such as TFIM or ISL on a zonal Rydberg prototype with two caches flanking compute and independently movable AOD columns, and compare measured wall-clock runtime and SWAP count against a degree-based grouping baseline. If the realized runtime reduction is not around 20% or the SWAP reduction not around 50%, the central co-design claim would be falsified; a second check is whether initialization trap changes across the memory/AOD boundary can actually be performed in parallel in that geometry.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

PachinQo claims that the bottleneck to running general quantum algorithms on zonal Rydberg machines is not just compilation but the fixed architecture itself. It therefore proposes a dual-cache geometry, a cache on each side of the compute zone with the right cache doubling as the readout zone, and a matching compiler that uses a greedy MaxCut partition to assign qubits to stationary SLM traps or mobile AOD columns so most CZ gates happen between one mobile and one stationary qubit. During execution the compiler sweeps AOD columns from alternate sides, moves idle columns into the opposite cache to avoid crosstalk, and decomposes SWAPs into their component CZ and U3 gates, executing one piece per layer so a SWAP does not stall other gates. In the paper's evaluation this co-design reduces circuit runtime by 20%, SWAP count by 50%, and raises estimated success probability by 45% on average over a degree-based grouping method, across 13 circuits of 51 to 1000 qubits.

Load-bearing premise

The result stands on the assumption that the hardware timing constants measured on existing zonal Rydberg machines, trap-change time, AOD movement speed, and zone dimensions, along with the assumption that all initialization trap changes can be run in parallel, remain valid in the proposed dual-cache geometry; if either fails on real hardware, the reported runtime and success-probability gains would not carry over.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On the paper's 13 benchmark circuits (51 to 1000 qubits), co-design lowers average circuit runtime by 20% and SWAP count by 50% relative to a degree-based grouping baseline.
  • Estimated probability of success improves by 45% on average in the paper's error model, directly because fewer SWAPs and shorter runtimes reduce error accumulation.
  • The dual-cache geometry alone buys a 24% runtime reduction over a single-cache version by cutting total movement by 32.3% and avoiding column starvation, while ESP is within 6%.
  • Using SWAPs instead of trap changes during execution cuts serial trap changes by 43% on average and runtime by 19% versus a trap-change variant.
  • Compilation stays lightweight, with a median of 296.4 milliseconds on a laptop, and the compiler needs no retuning when the static SLM atom grid is changed, so the same framework can be matched to different architecture layouts.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the co-design result transfers to hardware, the readout-zone-as-cache trick implies that idle measurement hardware can be repurposed as transport infrastructure, a principle that could reduce area overhead in other reconfigurable qubit platforms.
  • The failure of degree-based grouping on locally structured circuits such as Ising and TFIM suggests that for many near-term algorithms the relevant partition is interaction locality, not per-qubit degree; a similar connectivity-aware heuristic may benefit routing in other shuttling architectures.
  • Preemptive SWAP decomposition is effectively software pipelining of a routing operation, and the same one-gate-per-layer scheduling could be tested as a general compiler pass for architectures where SWAPs are not atomic.
  • Because performance is nearly independent of SLM grid geometry in the simulation, the framework opens a cheap knob: algorithm-specific atom arrangement can be chosen to match circuit structure without recompilation.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. PachinQo is a co-design framework for zonal addressing Rydberg atom quantum computers. It proposes a dual-cache architecture (repurposing the readout zone as a second cache), a greedy MaxCut-based grouping of qubits into static SLM traps and mobile AOD columns, and a layer-by-layer compiler that schedules CZ gates, U3 gates, and SWAPs while respecting AOD column-ordering constraints. The evaluation uses a custom simulator with parameters largely taken from Bluvstein et al. and compares against three self-constructed baselines (DegreeSplit, OneCache, TrapChange) on 13 benchmarks. Reported results include a 20% average runtime reduction, 50% fewer SWAPs, and 45% higher estimated success probability versus DegreeSplit.

Significance. The work addresses a genuine gap: prior zonal addressing demonstrations (Bluvstein et al., Stade et al.) target only surface-code-like parallel circuits, and there is no general compilation/co-design framework for this emerging architecture. The paper is commendable for open-sourcing the framework, for reporting compiler overheads on a commodity laptop, and for evaluating a diverse benchmark set up to 1000 qubits. If the hardware cost model is reliable, the runtime and ESP improvements are meaningful. However, the quantitative contributions are entirely simulation-based, and the central cost model has internal inconsistencies and a strong unvalidated parallelism assumption. The framework's qualitative design insights are likely to be useful to the community even if the reported numbers change under a more conservative cost model.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2, Sec. 4.2, Sec. 6.3, Table 1] The reported trap-change cost is internally inconsistent. Section 2 states that a trap change takes 25 times as long as a CZ gate, Section 4.2 states that it takes about 156 times as long as a CZ gate, and Section 6.3 states that it takes about 52 times as long as a SWAP gate, which is defined as three CZ gates plus six U3 gates. Using Table 1 (trap change 125 us, CZ 0.8 us, U3 2 us), the correct ratios are 156x a CZ and about 8.7x a full SWAP. These inconsistencies matter because trap-change time is a major factor in the initialization and measurement overhead of PachinQo and a dominant factor in the TrapChange baseline; the runtime comparisons in Figs. 12, 16, and 17 depend on this parameter. The authors should adopt a single, explicitly stated cost model and ensure all ratios are derived from it.
  2. [Sec. 4.2, Sec. 5, Sec. 6.3] The claim that only six serial trap changes are needed for every algorithm rests on an unvalidated and likely size-dependent assumption. Section 4.2 states that all memory-to-AOD and AOD-to-SLM transfers 'can be run in parallel' because atoms are initially organized into columns, but no hardware demonstration or reference is given for this capability in the proposed dual-cache geometry, which repurposes the readout zone as a cache. More concretely, Section 5 limits each AOD column to at most 4 atoms and gives zone dimensions that are doubled only for QV and ISL; for a 1000-qubit circuit with roughly 500 SLM-bound atoms, at least 125 AOD columns (or serial batches) would be needed. It is not established that the AOD can contain that many columns or that the parallel transfer can be performed without column-order violations. If these transfers serialize, the six-trap-change count in Fig. 17 becomes a lower bound that scales with qubit count, and the reported runtime and ESP advantages in Figs. 12 and 14 would be eroded, particularly for smaller circuits such as KNN, whose 11.6 ms runtime would be dominated by per-atom transfer times of 125 us each. The paper needs a hardware-based justification or a revised cost model that accounts for AOD capacity limits.
  3. [Sec. 4.8] The statement that 'PachinQo will never perform more than one SWAP in order to execute a single CZ gate' is asserted without proof and is load-bearing for the complexity bound and for the SWAP-count comparisons. Algorithm 1 assigns initial SLM/AOD groupings but does not guarantee that every CZ whose endpoints end up in the same trap type can be resolved with exactly one SWAP under the AOD ordering and cache constraints described in Sec. 4.4. If more than one SWAP is sometimes required, the O(G(Q_AOD Q_SLM + QG)) complexity analysis and the 50% SWAP reduction over DegreeSplit could both be affected. The authors should provide a proof of this invariant or empirically validate it by reporting the distribution of SWAPs per CZ in their simulations.
  4. [Sec. 5, Table 1, Figs. 12-14] The estimated success probability (ESP) is a product of assumed error rates (gate errors, readout error, T1/T2 decoherence) taken from multiple sources, and the 45% improvement is therefore not a measured quantity but a model output. The paper should state this more prominently in the abstract and conclusion, and it would benefit from a sensitivity analysis over the error parameters: the reported ESP gains could change materially if, for example, the SWAP error (1.51%) or the trap-change time differ on the proposed dual-cache hardware. Without such an analysis, the quantitative headline is difficult to assess.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 3] The header 'Algoritm' should be 'Algorithm'.
  2. [Fig. 18] Panel (c) is labeled 'Traingle Grid'; this should be 'Triangle Grid'.
  3. [Reference [38]] The title contains 'Dddressing'; it should be 'Addressing'.
  4. [Fig. 1(b)] The caption contains 'Vaccum Chamber'; it should be 'Vacuum Chamber'.
  5. [Sec. 4.8] The complexity expression O(G[Q_AOD Q_SLM + Q G]) uses nonstandard bracket notation; it should be written as O(G(Q_AOD Q_SLM + QG)).
  6. [Sec. 5] The text says 'For more figures on error and execution times', but it should be 'For more figures on error rates and execution times'; additionally, the description of how T1 and T2 are converted into error rates is missing and should be supplied.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: PachinQo's reported gains are produced by its simulator and ESP product, not by a fitted parameter or self-citation chain; the main risks are unvalidated hardware assumptions, which are correctness issues, not circularity.

full rationale

PachinQo's central claims (20% runtime reduction, 50% SWAP reduction, and 45% ESP improvement over DegreeSplit) come from a deterministic architectural simulator plus a product-form ESP metric; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is said to derive. The primary comparison isolates a single design variable (the SLM/AOD grouping heuristic) by keeping all remaining compilation procedures identical, so the measured deltas are not forced by construction. The six trap-changes per algorithm, the parallel trap-change guarantee, and the inherited hardware timings are stated architectural assumptions; even if optimistic or invalid on real hardware, they are not circular because the reported runtime and ESP numbers follow from the stated cost model rather than being reverse-engineered from the target improvement. The self-citations to Patel et al. (UREQA, GEYSER, GRAPHINE, refs [31]-[33]) appear only as prior-art background for individual/global addressing compilers and are not load-bearing for PachinQo's zonal co-design claims. The evaluation is self-contained against external benchmark suites (QASMBench and ArQTiC). The internal inconsistency in trap-change cost scaling (25x vs 156x a CZ) is a modeling and correctness concern, not evidence of a circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on several unverified modeling choices: the dual-cache geometry is assumed to inherit zonal addressing costs from [9], parallel trap changes are assumed feasible, and the greedy MaxCut invariant (at most one SWAP per CZ) is assumed to hold. These are not derived from physics or prior data beyond the cited hardware papers.

free parameters (4)
  • Zone dimensions = compute 190x130 um, caches 80x130 um, memory 190x50 um; doubled for QV/ISL
    Hand-chosen in Sec. 5 to fit up to 280 atoms and 4 per AOD column; not derived from measured hardware constraints.
  • Maximum atoms per AOD column = 4
    Ad hoc constraint in Sec. 5 to allow crosstalk-free spreading within the grid; not tied to a measured laser capacity.
  • Crosstalk-free distance = 10 um
    Assumed in Sec. 5 as the distance at which crosstalk is avoided; no reference is given for this specific value.
  • Rydberg interaction distance threshold = 2 um
    Assumed in Sec. 5 as the distance below which a CZ interaction occurs; treated as a fixed simulation threshold.
assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper Trap changes can be executed fully in parallel for all atoms in memory-to-AOD and AOD-to-SLM transfers.
    Sec. 4.2: 'PachinQo implicitly guarantees that all the trap changes required ... can be run in parallel' - an unverified hardware assumption central to the low initialization overhead.
  • domain assumption The zonal addressing cost model and zone dimensions from Bluvstein et al. [9] remain valid after adding a second cache and repurposing the readout zone as a cache.
    Sec. 5 uses [9] parameter values without re-validation for the modified geometry.
  • domain assumption AOD columns maintain relative ordering and cannot overlap.
    Sec. 2 and Sec. 4.1 describe the ordering constraint; the scheduler relies on it for all movement decisions.
  • ad hoc to paper The greedy MaxCut grouping produces a labeling such that every CZ gate can be executed with at most one SWAP.
    Sec. 4.8: 'PachinQo will never perform more than one SWAP in order to execute a single CZ gate' - this invariant is assumed by the complexity argument and the scheduler.
invented entities (1)
  • Dual quantum cache (left and right cache zones flanking compute)
    purpose: Store unused AOD columns to avoid crosstalk and reduce movement; the right cache doubles as the readout zone.
    A proposed architectural addition; no hardware demonstration or independent evidence is provided in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modeling and Simulating Rydberg Atom Quantum Computers for Hardware-Software Co-design with PachinQo." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DMPTZQJQ

@misc{pith2026241207181,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modeling and Simulating Rydberg Atom Quantum Computers for Hardware-Software Co-design with PachinQo},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DMPTZQJQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.07181}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum computing has the potential to accelerate various domains: scientific computation, machine learning, and optimization. Recently, Rydberg atom quantum computing has emerged as a promising quantum computing technology, especially with the demonstration of the zonal addressing architecture. However, this demonstration is only compatible with one type of quantum algorithm, and extending it to compile and execute general quantum algorithms is a challenge. To address it, we propose PachinQo, a framework to co-design the architecture and compilation for zonal addressing systems for any given quantum algorithm. PachinQo's evaluation demonstrates its ability to improve a quantum algorithm's estimated probability of success by 45% on average in error-prone quantum environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.07181 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) An example quantum circuit. The qubit state evolves from left [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) The CZ gate between qubits Q2-Q3 can execute as they are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Two methods of executing the Q0-Q1 CZ gate: (1) Trap change to convert Q1 from an SLM to an AOD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (17 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: We develop PachinQo for the recently-demonstrated zonal addressing architecture [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: In the current zonal architecture, it is possible to run algorithms with all parallel two-qubit CZ gates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: We propose the use of the readout zone as a cache to store AOD qubits out of the compute zone. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Visual representation of PachinQo’s procedure for mapping the circuit onto the qubits and initializing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: We propose an architecture with two caches, one on both sides of the compute zone, for ease of AOD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The steps involved in PachinQo’s layer-by-layer execution of the example circuit shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: To run a CZ gate on Q0-Q1, the AOD column containing Q1 is brought closer to Q0, and the other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Last step for the example circuit in Fig. 1(a). Perform trap changes if needed, move all qubits to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: PachinQo reduces the average circuit runtime by 20% over DegreeSplit and outperforms it in most cases. The numbers inside the bars indicate the raw runtimes in 𝑚𝑠. While the circuit runtimes are short, any decrease improves ESP significantly due to qubit state decoher…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: PachinQo reduces the avg. num. of SWAPs by 50% over DegreeSplit and outperforms in most cases. BV CAT DNN GHZ ISN ISL QV KNN QFT QGAN SWP TFIM 0 20 40 60 80 100 Est. Success Prob. (ESP) (% of the Best Case) 7.7e-01 1.6e-01 2.4e-02 1.7e-01 1.2e-01 2.1e-04 0.0e+00 2.6e-…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: DegreeSplit has a 31% lower estimated probability of success on average as compared to PachinQo. The numbers corresponding to the bars show the raw ESP values. has the same architecture as PachinQo), but it uses trap changes during circuit execution instead of always …
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: PachinQo improves the avg. circuit runtime by 24% over OneCache and outperforms it in all cases. more CZ gates, which in turn lead to higher operational error and higher runtime. Conversely, since PachinQo has fewer SWAP gates, it has a better performance than DegreeS…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: PachinQo improves the avg. circuit runtime by 19% over TrapChange as it reduces serial trap changes. BV CAT DNN GHZ ISN ISL QV KNN QFT QGAN SWP TFIM 0 20 40 60 80 100 Number of Trap Changes (% of the Worst Case) 6 6 30 6 6 6 150514 88 133 78 83 6 6 11613 6 6 6 6 6 6 6…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: While some algorithms with few trap changes may not benefit from PachinQo’s SWAP operations, PachinQo’s use of SWAP operations helps reduce trap changes by 43% on average, which is especially beneficial for algorithms with many trap changes. 6.3 Compiler Comparison: T…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: We explore the four types of grids depicted for SLM qubit arrangement. (a) The large square grid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: PachinQo achieves similar circuit runtimes on average regardless of the chosen SLM arrangement grid. Nonetheless, some algorithms, such as TFIM, can benefit from being matched to compatible SLM arrangement grids (e.g., any grid other than the star grid). Note that it …
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: PachinQo achieves mostly similar ESP results on average for different SLM arrangement grids. However, the large square grid and the triangle grid perform better for some algorithms and make a substantial difference for algorithms like DNN, QFT, QGAN, and SWP. Note tha…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [9]

    Dolev Bluvstein, Simon J Evered, Alexandra A Geim, Sophie H Li, Hengyun Zhou, Tom Manovitz, Sepehr Ebadi, Madelyn Cain, Marcin Kalinowski, Dominik Hangleiter, et al. 2024. Logical Quantum Processor Based on Reconfigurable Atom Arrays. Nature 626, 7997 (2024), 58–65

    work page 2024

  2. [1]

    C S Adams, J D Pritchard, and J P Shaffer. 2019. Rydberg Atom Quantum Technologies. (July 2019). arXiv:1907.09231 [physics.atom-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  3. [2]

    Martin Adams, Martin Traub, Hans-Dieter Hoffmann, Florian Meinert, Philipp Ilzhöfer, Thomas Westphalen, Kersten Ludwig, Jiachen Zhao, Achim Scholz, Govind Unnikrishnan, Ratnesh Kumar Gupta, Tilman Pfau, and Constantin L. Haefner. 2024. Optical setup for a two-dimensional tweezer array with independently adjustable columns for neutral atom quantum computin...

    2024

  4. [3]

    Chow, Antonio D

    Gadi Aleksandrowicz, Thomas Alexander, Panagiotis Barkoutsos, Luciano Bello, Yael Ben-Haim, David Bucher, Francisco Jose Cabrera-Hernández, Jorge Carballo-Franquis, Adrian Chen, Chun-Fu Chen, Jerry M. Chow, Antonio D. Córcoles-Gonzales, Abigail J. Cross, Andrew Cross, Juan Cruz-Benito, Chris Culver, Salvador De La Puente González, Enrique De La Torre, Del...

    2019

  5. [4]

    Bardin, Rami Barends, Rupak Biswas, Sergio Boixo, Fernando G

    Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Joseph C. Bardin, Rami Barends, Rupak Biswas, Sergio Boixo, Fernando G. S. L. Brandao, David A. Buell, Brian Burkett, Yu Chen, Zijun Chen, Ben Chiaro, Roberto Collins, William Courtney, Andrew Dunsworth, Edward Farhi, Brooks Foxen, Austin Fowler, Craig Gidney, Marissa Giustina, Rob Graff, Keith Guerin, St...

    work page

  6. [5]

    Jonathan M Baker, Andrew Litteken, Casey Duckering, Henry Hoffmann, Hannes Bernien, and Frederic T Chong

    work page

  7. [6]

    Daniel Barredo, Vincent Lienhard, Sylvain de Léséleuc, Thierry Lahaye, and Antoine Browaeys. 2018. Synthetic Three-Dimensional Atomic Structures Assembled Atom by Atom. Nature 561, 7721 (Sept. 2018), 79–82

    work page 2018

  8. [7]

    Lindsay Bassman, Connor Powers, and Wibe A de Jong. 2021. ArQTiC: A Full-Stack Software Package for Simulating Materials on Quantum Computers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.04749 (2021)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

Show all 52 references
  1. [8]

    Ethan Bernstein and Umesh Vazirani. 1993. Quantum Complexity Theory. In Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing . 11–20. 24 Jason Zev Ludmir, Yuqian Huo, Nicholas S. DiBrita, and Tirthak Patel

    1993

  2. [10]

    Dolev Bluvstein, Harry Levine, Giulia Semeghini, Tout T Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Marcin Kalinowski, Alexander Keesling, Nishad Maskara, Hannes Pichler, Markus Greiner, et al. 2022. A Quantum Processor based on Coherent Transport of Entangled Atom Arrays. Nature 604, 7906 (2022), 451–456

    2022

  3. [11]

    Sebastian Brandhofer, Ilia Polian, and Kevin Krsulich. 2023. Optimal Qubit Reuse for Near-Term Quantum Computers. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) , Vol. 1. IEEE, 859–869

    2023

  4. [12]

    Clayton W Commander. 2009. Maximum Cut Problem, MaxCut. Encyclopedia of Optimization 2 (2009)

    2009

  5. [13]

    Pierre-Luc Dallaire-Demers and Nathan Killoran. 2018. Quantum Generative Adversarial Networks. Physical Review A 98, 1 (2018), 012324

    2018

  6. [14]

    Yijie Dang, Nan Jiang, Hao Hu, Zhuoxiao Ji, and Wenyin Zhang. 2018. Image Classification based on Quantum K-Nearest-Neighbor Algorithm. Quantum Information Processing 17 (2018), 1–18

    2018

  7. [15]

    Evered, Dolev Bluvstein, Marcin Kalinowski, Sepehr Ebadi, Tom Manovitz, Hengyun Zhou, Sophie H

    Simon J. Evered, Dolev Bluvstein, Marcin Kalinowski, Sepehr Ebadi, Tom Manovitz, Hengyun Zhou, Sophie H. Li, Alexandra A. Geim, Tout T. Wang, Nishad Maskara, Harry Levine, Giulia Semeghini, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D. Lukin. 2023. High-Fidelity Parallel Enta...

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    Michael Fleischhauer and Mikhail D Lukin. 2002. Quantum Memory for Photons: Dark-State Polaritons. Physical Review A 65, 2 (2002), 022314

    2002

  9. [17]

    Steph Foulds, Viv Kendon, and Tim Spiller. 2021. The Controlled SWAP Test for Determining Quantum Entanglement. Quantum Science and Technology 6, 3 (2021), 035002

    2021

  10. [18]

    T M Graham, M Kwon, B Grinkemeyer, Z Marra, X Jiang, M T Lichtman, Y Sun, M Ebert, and M Saffman. 2019. Rydberg-Mediated Entanglement in a Two-Dim. Neutral Atom Qubit Array.Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 23 (Dec. 2019), 230501

    2019

  11. [19]

    T. M. Graham, Y. Song, J. Scott, C. Poole, L. Phuttitarn, K. Jooya, P. Eichler, X. Jiang, A. Marra, B. Grinkemeyer, M. Kwon, M. Ebert, J. Cherek, M. T. Lichtman, M. Gillette, J. Gilbert, D. Bowman, T. Ballance, C. Campbell, E. D. Dahl, O. Crawford, N. S. Blunt, B. Rogers, T. N...

    2022 doi

  12. [20]

    Loic Henriet, Lucas Beguin, Adrien Signoles, Thierry Lahaye, Antoine Browaeys, Georges-Olivier Reymond, and Christophe Jurczak. 2020. Quantum Computing with Neutral Atoms. (June 2020). arXiv:2006.12326 [quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Henning Labuhn, Daniel Barredo, Sylvain Ravets, Sylvain De Léséleuc, Tommaso Macrì, Thierry Lahaye, and Antoine Browaeys. 2016. Tunable Two-Dimensional Arrays of Single Rydberg Atoms for Realizing Quantum Ising Models. Nature 534, 7609 (2016), 667–670

    2016

  14. [22]

    Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Omran, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D

    Harry Levine, Dolev Bluvstein, Alexander Keesling, Tout T. Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Omran, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D. Lukin. 2022. Dispersive Optical Systems for Scalable Raman Driving of Hyperfine Qubits. Phys. Rev. A 105 (Mar 2022), 032...

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    Harry Levine, Alexander Keesling, Ahmed Omran, Hannes Bernien, Sylvain Schwartz, Alexander S Zibrov, Manuel Endres, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D Lukin. 2018. High-Fidelity Control and Entanglement of Rydberg-Atom Qubits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 12 (Sept. 2018), 123603

    2018

  16. [24]

    Harry Levine, Alexander Keesling, Giulia Semeghini, Ahmed Omran, Tout T Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Hannes Bernien, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, Hannes Pichler, and Mikhail D Lukin. 2019. Parallel Implementation of High-Fidelity Multi-Qubit Gates with Neutral Atoms. (Aug. 2019). ar...

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ang Li, Samuel Stein, Sriram Krishnamoorthy, and James Ang. 2023. QASMBench: A Low-Level Quantum Benchmark Suite for NISQ Evaluation and Simulation. ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing 4, 2 (2023), 1–26

    2023

  18. [26]

    Rui Li, Shurui Li, Dongmin Yu, Jing Qian, and Weiping Zhang. 2022. Optimal Model for Fewer-Qubit CNOT Gates with Rydberg Atoms. Physical Review Applied 17, 2 (2022), 024014

    2022

  19. [27]

    Andrew Litteken, Jonathan M Baker, and Frederic T Chong. 2022. Reducing Runtime Overhead via Use-Based Migration in Neutral Atom Quantum Architectures. In2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE). IEEE, 566–576

    2022

  20. [28]

    Schrödinger Cat

    Christopher Monroe, Dawn M Meekhof, Brian E King, and David J Wineland. 1996. A “Schrödinger Cat” Superposition State of an Atom. science 272, 5265 (1996), 1131–1136

    1996

  21. [29]

    Victor Namias. 1980. The Fractional order Fourier Transform and its Application to Quantum Mechanics. IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics 25, 3 (1980), 241–265

    1980

  22. [30]

    Florence Nogrette, Henning Labuhn, Sylvain Ravets, Daniel Barredo, Lucas Béguin, Aline Vernier, Thierry Lahaye, and Antoine Browaeys. 2014. Single-Atom Trapping in Holographic 2D Arrays of Microtraps with Arbitrary Geometries. Physical Review X 4, 2 (2014), 021034

    2014

  23. [31]

    Tirthak Patel, Baolin Li, Rohan Basu Roy, and Devesh Tiwari. 2020. UREQA: Leveraging Operation-Aware Error Rates for Effective Quantum Circuit Mapping on NISQ-Era Quantum Computers. In 2020 USENIX Annual Technical Modeling and Simulating Rydberg Atom Quantum Computers for Hard...

    2020

  24. [32]

    Tirthak Patel, Daniel Silver, and Devesh Tiwari. 2022. GEYSER: A Compilation Framework for Quantum Computing with Neutral Atoms. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture . 383–395

    2022

  25. [33]

    Tirthak Patel, Daniel Silver, and Devesh Tiwari. 2023. GRAPHINE: Enhanced Neutral Atom Quantum Computing using Application-Specific Rydberg Atom Arrangement. In Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis . 1–15

    2023

  26. [34]

    Pierre Pfeuty. 1970. The One-dimensional Ising Model with a Transverse Field. ANNALS of Physics 57, 1 (1970), 79–90

    1970

  27. [35]

    John Preskill. 2018. Quantum Computing in the NISQ Era and Beyond. Quantum 2 (2018), 79

    2018

  28. [36]

    John Preskill. 2021. Quantum computing 40 years later. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10522 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    M Saffman, II Beterov, A Dalal, EJ Páez, and BC Sanders. 2020. Symmetric Rydberg Controlled-Z Gates with Adiabatic Pulses. Physical Review A 101, 6 (2020), 062309

    2020

  30. [38]

    Xiao-Feng Shi. 2020. Single-site Rydberg Dddressing in 3D Atomic Arrays for Quantum Computing with Neutral Atoms. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 53, 5 (2020), 054002

    2020

  31. [39]

    N Šibalić, J D Pritchard, C S Adams, and K J Weatherill. 2016. ARC: An Open-Source Library for Calculating Properties of Alkali Rydberg Atoms. (Dec. 2016). arXiv:1612.05529 [physics.atom-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Yannick Stade, Ludwig Schmid, Lukas Burgholzer, and Robert Wille. 2024. An Abstract Model and Efficient Routing for Logical Entangling Gates on Zoned Neutral Atom Architectures. arXiv:2405.08068 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/ abs/2405.08068

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Samuel A Stein, Betis Baheri, Daniel Chen, Ying Mao, Qiang Guan, Ang Li, Shuai Xu, and Caiwen Ding. 2022. QuClassi: A Hybrid Deep Neural Network Architecture based on Quantum State Fidelity. Proceedings of Machine Learning and Systems 4 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Bochen Tan, Dolev Bluvstein, Mikhail D Lukin, and Jason Cong. 2022. Qubit Mapping for Reconfigurable Atom Arrays. In Proceedings of the 41st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design . 1–9

    2022

  35. [43]

    Lukin, and Jason Cong

    Daniel Bochen Tan, Dolev Bluvstein, Mikhail D. Lukin, and Jason Cong. 2023. Compiling Quantum Circuits for Dynamically Field-Programmable Neutral Atoms Array Processors. arXiv:2306.03487 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Swamit S Tannu and Moinuddin Qureshi. 2019. Ensemble of Diverse Mappings: Improving Reliability of Quantum Computers by Orchestrating Dissimilar Mistakes. InProceedings of the 52nd Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture. ACM, 253–265

    2019

  37. [45]

    Hanrui Wang, Bochen Tan, Pengyu Liu, Yilian Liu, Jiaqi Gu, Jason Cong, and Song Han. 2023. Q-Pilot: Field Pro- grammable Quantum Array Compilation with Flying Ancillas. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16190 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  38. [46]

    T. Wilk, A. Gaëtan, C. Evellin, J. Wolters, Y. Miroshnychenko, P. Grangier, and A. Browaeys. 2010. Entanglement of Two Individual Neutral Atoms Using Rydberg Blockade. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (Jan 2010), 010502. Issue 1. https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.010502

    2010 doi

  39. [47]

    Karen Wintersperger, Florian Dommert, Thomas Ehmer, Andrey Hoursanov, Johannes Klepsch, Wolfgang Mauerer, Georg Reuber, Thomas Strohm, Ming Yin, and Sebastian Luber. 2023. Neutral Atom Quantum Computing Hardware: Performance and End-User Perspective. EPJ Quantum Technology 10,...

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    Jonathan Wurtz, Alexei Bylinskii, Boris Braverman, Jesse Amato-Grill, Sergio H Cantu, Florian Huber, Alexander Lukin, Fangli Liu, Phillip Weinberg, John Long, et al. 2023. Aquila: QuEra’s 256-Qubit Neutral-Atom Quantum Computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.11727 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Lei Xie, Jidong Zhai, and Weimin Zheng. 2021. Mitigating Crosstalk in Quantum Computers through Commutativity- Based Instruction Reordering. In 2021 58th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) . IEEE, 445–450

    2021

  42. [50]

    Shi-Biao Zheng and Guang-Can Guo. 1997. Preparation of Multiatom GHZ States. Journal of Modern Optics 44, 5 (1997), 963–966

    1997

  43. [2019]

    Nature 574, 7779 (2019), 505–510

    Quantum Supremacy using a Programmable Superconducting Processor. Nature 574, 7779 (2019), 505–510. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5

    2019 doi

  44. [2021]

    In 2021 ACM/IEEE 48th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA)

    Exploiting Long-Distance Interactions and Tolerating Atom Loss in Neutral Atom Quantum Architectures. In 2021 ACM/IEEE 48th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA) . 818–831

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.