pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18479 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 📡 eess.SP

Recognition: unknown

Warm-Start Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm for QAM MIMO Data Detection

Soumyadip Paul , Sourav Banerjee , Debanjan Bhowmik , Neel Kanth Kundu
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 03:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords MIMO data detectionQAMQAOAwarm-startHUBOsemidefinite relaxationsymbol error ratequantum hardware
0
0 comments X

The pith

A warm-started linear-ramp QAOA solves the HUBO problem for large QAM MIMO detection with accuracy near the optimal ML detector.

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

This paper develops a hybrid quantum-classical framework to detect symbols in large-scale MIMO systems that use higher-order QAM. Gray-coded modulation turns the maximum-likelihood problem into a higher-order unconstrained binary optimization task whose classical solution grows exponentially with the number of antennas and bits. The authors replace brute-force search with a warm-start linear-ramp QAOA whose initial parameters come from a low-rank semidefinite relaxation solved by block coordinate descent. Simulations show the resulting detector produces lower symbol error rates and converges in fewer iterations than both classical heuristics and plain QAOA, while hardware runs on IBM devices reach near-ML accuracy at low SNR.

Core claim

The central claim is that a structured warm-start obtained from a low-rank semidefinite relaxation via block coordinate descent, followed by linear-ramp parameterization of QAOA, lets the algorithm solve the HUBO formulation of QAM MIMO detection efficiently enough to approach maximum-likelihood performance and to run on present-day quantum hardware with only moderate noise-induced loss.

What carries the argument

The WSLR-QAOA, which uses a block-coordinate-descent solution of a low-rank semidefinite relaxation as a high-quality initial state and a linear ramp schedule to steer the variational parameters of QAOA applied to the higher-order unconstrained binary objective.

If this is right

  • The detector outperforms standard classical methods in symbol error rate across tested SNR regimes.
  • Convergence occurs in fewer QAOA iterations than the uninitialized algorithm.
  • End-to-end performance remains close to the optimal maximum-likelihood detector.
  • On IBM quantum processors the same circuit reaches near-ML accuracy at low SNR and stays competitive at higher SNR.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar warm-start techniques based on cheap classical relaxations may accelerate QAOA on other combinatorial problems that arise in wireless communications.
  • The observed hardware degradation at high SNR points to the value of noise-mitigation methods that could be layered on top of the same circuit.
  • If quantum device size and fidelity continue to improve, the same formulation could scale to larger antenna counts without classical exponential blow-up.

Load-bearing premise

The low-rank semidefinite relaxation solved by block coordinate descent supplies a sufficiently high-quality warm-start that meaningfully improves QAOA convergence speed and final symbol error rate for the HUBO formulation.

What would settle it

A side-by-side run of WSLR-QAOA against an otherwise identical QAOA started from random parameters that shows no reduction in iterations to convergence or no drop in final symbol error rate would falsify the benefit of the proposed warm-start.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18479 by Debanjan Bhowmik, Neel Kanth Kundu, Soumyadip Paul, Sourav Banerjee.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The figure illustrates a unified quantum–classical pipeline for solving the MIMO detection problem. The transmitted–received signal model is first [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: QAOA cost landscape analysis for a 2 × 2 MIMO system at p = 5 layers and SNR = 7.0 dB. Top: Expected cost ⟨HC ⟩ evaluated over a uniform grid of parameter schedules (γmax, βmax) ∈ [0, 3]2 for six algorithm variants grouped by parameter schedule (flat vs. linear ramp) and initialization/mixer strategy (standard, warm-start RX, warm-start WS). TABLE II PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT QAOA VARIANTS Algori… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of SER vs SNR performance with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Data detection in large-scale multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems with higher-order quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) remains a challenging problem due to the exponential complexity of the classical maximum likelihood (ML) detector. This challenge is further amplified by Gray-coded modulation, which introduces nonlinear symbol-to-bit mappings and transforms the problem into a higher-order unconstrained binary optimization (HUBO) formulation. To address this problem, this paper presents a hybrid quantum-classical detection framework that leverages a warm-start linear-ramp Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (WSLR-QAOA) for solving the resulting HUBO problem. A structured warm-start based on a low-rank semidefinite relaxation, solved via a block coordinate descent (BCD) method, provides an efficient and high-quality initialization, while a linear ramp parameterization guides the QAOA optimization. Simulation results show that the proposed framework outperforms classical methods in terms of symbol error rate (SER) and converges faster than standard QAOA, while achieving performance close to the optimal ML detector. Furthermore, the WSLR-QAOA algorithm is validated on actual IBM quantum hardware, where it achieves near-ML performance at low SNR and maintains competitive accuracy at higher SNR despite moderate degradation due to hardware noise. This demonstrates the practical potential of the HUBO-based WSLR-QAOA algorithm for large-scale MIMO data detection.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a hybrid quantum-classical framework (WSLR-QAOA) for data detection in large-scale MIMO systems using higher-order Gray-coded QAM. The approach formulates the problem as a higher-order unconstrained binary optimization (HUBO) and solves it via a warm-start linear-ramp QAOA, where the warm-start is obtained from a low-rank semidefinite relaxation solved by block coordinate descent (BCD) and the QAOA uses a linear ramp parameterization. The central claims are that WSLR-QAOA achieves symbol error rate (SER) performance close to the optimal maximum-likelihood (ML) detector, outperforms standard classical detectors and vanilla QAOA in convergence speed and accuracy, and delivers near-ML results on IBM quantum hardware at low SNR (with moderate degradation at higher SNR due to noise).

Significance. If the performance claims hold under rigorous verification, the work would demonstrate a practical hybrid strategy that combines classical convex relaxations with variational quantum algorithms for a concrete communications problem. The structured warm-start and hardware validation on real devices are positive elements that could encourage further exploration of quantum methods in wireless signal processing. However, the significance for the motivating large-scale MIMO regimes remains conditional on evidence that the quantum component provides benefits beyond what the classical BCD warm-start already achieves in regimes where exact ML remains tractable.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5 (Simulation Results)] §5 (Simulation Results): The reported SER gains and faster convergence are presented without specifying the number of Monte Carlo trials, error bars or confidence intervals, exact classical baseline implementations (e.g., ZF, MMSE, or sphere-decoding variants), or post-processing steps. These omissions prevent independent verification of whether the claimed improvements over classical methods and standard QAOA are statistically robust.
  2. [§6 (Hardware Validation)] §6 (Hardware Validation): The IBM device experiments claim near-ML performance, yet the manuscript does not report the MIMO dimensions (Nt, Nr, M) or resulting qubit count. Given that Gray-coded QAM yields N = Nt · log2(M) binary variables and current NISQ hardware supports reliable circuits for only ~20-40 qubits, the tested instances are likely small enough (e.g., 2×2 or 4×4 with 4-QAM/16-QAM) that classical ML is feasible; in such cases the observed accuracy may be driven primarily by the BCD warm-start rather than the QAOA layer.
  3. [§4 (WSLR-QAOA Algorithm)] §4 (WSLR-QAOA Algorithm): No ablation is provided that isolates the contribution of the QAOA optimization step from the BCD warm-start alone. Without a direct comparison of BCD-initialized classical solution versus the full WSLR-QAOA pipeline, it is unclear whether the quantum variational layer is load-bearing for the reported convergence speed and final SER improvements.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction refer to 'classical methods' generically; naming the specific detectors (ZF, MMSE, etc.) used for comparison would improve readability.
  2. [§5] Figure captions and axis labels in the SER plots should explicitly state the MIMO configuration, SNR range, and number of QAOA layers used for each curve.
  3. [§3] The HUBO cost function in the problem formulation section would benefit from an explicit expansion showing how the MIMO channel and Gray mapping enter the higher-order terms.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and rigor of the manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating the revisions made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The reported SER gains and faster convergence are presented without specifying the number of Monte Carlo trials, error bars or confidence intervals, exact classical baseline implementations (e.g., ZF, MMSE, or sphere-decoding variants), or post-processing steps. These omissions prevent independent verification of whether the claimed improvements over classical methods and standard QAOA are statistically robust.

    Authors: We agree that these experimental details are essential for reproducibility and assessing statistical significance. In the revised manuscript, Section 5 now specifies that all SER results are averaged over 10,000 independent Monte Carlo channel realizations, includes error bars representing the standard error of the mean, provides explicit descriptions of the classical baselines (zero-forcing, MMSE, and a sphere-decoding implementation with radius chosen for near-ML performance), and clarifies the post-processing steps (majority-vote bit-to-symbol mapping from QAOA measurement samples). These additions enable independent verification of the reported gains. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The IBM device experiments claim near-ML performance, yet the manuscript does not report the MIMO dimensions (Nt, Nr, M) or resulting qubit count. Given that Gray-coded QAM yields N = Nt · log2(M) binary variables and current NISQ hardware supports reliable circuits for only ~20-40 qubits, the tested instances are likely small enough (e.g., 2×2 or 4×4 with 4-QAM/16-QAM) that classical ML is feasible; in such cases the observed accuracy may be driven primarily by the BCD warm-start rather than the QAOA layer.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this omission. The revised Section 6 now explicitly reports the hardware experiment parameters: a 2×2 MIMO system with 4-QAM, yielding N=4 binary variables and a 4-qubit circuit. We acknowledge that classical ML remains tractable at this scale and that the BCD warm-start contributes substantially to the observed accuracy. The hardware results are presented as a proof-of-concept demonstrating end-to-end execution on real NISQ hardware, including noise effects on the variational circuit. We have added text noting that the QAOA refinement step yields further SER improvement over the BCD solution in corresponding noiseless simulations, while recognizing that larger-scale hardware demonstrations will be required to highlight quantum contributions in regimes where exact ML is intractable. revision: partial

  3. Referee: No ablation is provided that isolates the contribution of the QAOA optimization step from the BCD warm-start alone. Without a direct comparison of BCD-initialized classical solution versus the full WSLR-QAOA pipeline, it is unclear whether the quantum variational layer is load-bearing for the reported convergence speed and final SER improvements.

    Authors: We agree that isolating the incremental benefit of the QAOA layer strengthens the claims. The original comparisons focused on WSLR-QAOA versus standard (non-warm-started) QAOA and classical detectors. The BCD step solves the low-rank SDP relaxation classically and supplies the warm-start angles; the linear-ramp QAOA then performs variational optimization in the quantum domain. In the revised manuscript, Section 4 includes additional explanatory text on this pipeline, and Section 5 adds a direct comparison (new table/curves) of SER and convergence obtained from the BCD solution alone versus the full WSLR-QAOA pipeline. These results show that the QAOA refinement closes part of the remaining gap to ML performance, although the gain is modest for the smallest instances, consistent with the referee's observation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected; derivation chain is self-contained

full rationale

The paper introduces WSLR-QAOA as a hybrid method with warm-start from low-rank SDR solved by BCD and linear-ramp parameterization. These are independent design choices whose benefits are measured empirically against external benchmarks (ML detector, classical methods, standard QAOA) and real IBM hardware. No step reduces claimed performance gains or convergence to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or self-citation chain by construction. The derivation relies on standard optimization techniques and falsifiable comparisons outside the paper's fitted values.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review prevents identification of exact free parameters or domain assumptions; the formulation implicitly relies on standard quantum circuit assumptions and the existence of an efficient classical SDR solver, but no explicit invented entities or fitted constants are stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5552 in / 1331 out tokens · 23224 ms · 2026-05-10T03:38:08.803923+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    6G wireless communications: Vision and potential techniques,

    P. Yang, Y . Xiao, M. Xiao, and S. Li, “6G wireless communications: Vision and potential techniques,”IEEE Network, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 70– 75, 2019

    2019

  2. [2]

    An overview of MIMO communications - a key to gigabit wireless,

    A. Paulraj, D. Gore, R. Nabar, and H. Bolcskei, “An overview of MIMO communications - a key to gigabit wireless,”Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 198–218, 2004

    2004

  3. [3]

    On the expected complexity of integer least- squares problems,

    B. Hassibi and H. Vikalo, “On the expected complexity of integer least- squares problems,”IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 2806–2818, 2005

    2005

  4. [4]

    Computational complexity of optimum multiuser detection,

    S. Verd ´u, “Computational complexity of optimum multiuser detection,” Algorithmica, vol. 4, no. 1-4, pp. 303–312, 1989

    1989

  5. [5]

    Design and simulation of qam modulator and demodulator for 5g wireless systems,

    S. Vishwa, J. Mohammed Habees, T. Archana, and A. Hema Malini, “Design and simulation of qam modulator and demodulator for 5g wireless systems,” inProceedings of International Conference on Power Electronics and Renewable Energy Systems, C. Kamalakannan, S. S. Dash, B. K. Panigrahi, and M. A. Tankari, Eds. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026, pp. 371–381

    2026

  6. [6]

    On the expected complexity of integer least- squares problems,

    B. Hassibi and H. Vikalo, “On the expected complexity of integer least- squares problems,” in2002 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 2, 2002, pp. II–1497–II–1500. 11

    2002

  7. [7]

    On the complexity of sphere decoding in digital communications,

    J. Jalden and B. Ottersten, “On the complexity of sphere decoding in digital communications,”IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1474–1484, 2005

    2005

  8. [8]

    Semidefinite relaxation of quadratic optimization problems,

    Z.-q. Luo, W.-k. Ma, A. M.-c. So, Y . Ye, and S. Zhang, “Semidefinite relaxation of quadratic optimization problems,”IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 20–34, 2010

    2010

  9. [9]

    Low complexity soft decision technique for gray mapping modulation,

    D. Lin, Y . Xiao, and S. Li, “Low complexity soft decision technique for gray mapping modulation,”Wireless Personal Communications, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 383–392, 2010

    2010

  10. [10]

    Bit metric generation for gray coded qam signals,

    K. Hyun and D. Yoon, “Bit metric generation for gray coded qam signals,”IEE Proceedings - Communications, vol. 152, pp. 1134–1138, 2005

    2005

  11. [11]

    High-order-modulation large MIMO detector based on physics-inspired methods,

    Q.-G. Zeng, X.-P. Cui, X.-Z. Tao, J.-Q. Hu, S.-J. Pan, W. E. Sha, and M.-H. Yung, “High-order-modulation large MIMO detector based on physics-inspired methods,”Phys. Rev. Appl., vol. 24, p. 034027, Sep 2025

    2025

  12. [12]

    Ising formulations of many np problems,

    A. Lucas, “Ising formulations of many np problems,”Frontiers in Physics, vol. V olume 2 - 2014, 2014

    2014

  13. [13]

    Quantum algorithms for the physical layer: Potential applications to physical layer security,

    T. Matsumine, H. Ochiai, and J. Shikata, “Quantum algorithms for the physical layer: Potential applications to physical layer security,”IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 13 988–14 009, 2025

    2025

  14. [14]

    Quantum algorithm for higher-order unconstrained binary optimization and MIMO maximum likelihood detection,

    M. Norimoto, R. Mori, and N. Ishikawa, “Quantum algorithm for higher-order unconstrained binary optimization and MIMO maximum likelihood detection,”IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 1926–1939, 2023

    1926

  15. [15]

    Quantum annealing for next-generation MU-MIMO detection: Evaluation and challenges,

    J. C. De Luna Ducoing and K. Nikitopoulos, “Quantum annealing for next-generation MU-MIMO detection: Evaluation and challenges,” in ICC 2022 - IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2022, pp. 637–642

    2022

  16. [16]

    Leveraging quantum annealing for large MIMO processing in centralized radio access networks,

    M. Kim, D. Venturelli, and K. Jamieson, “Leveraging quantum annealing for large MIMO processing in centralized radio access networks,” Association for Computing Machinery, 2019

    2019

  17. [17]

    Op- timizing variational quantum algorithms using pontryagin’s minimum principle,

    Z.-C. Yang, A. Rahmani, A. Shabani, H. Neven, and C. Chamon, “Op- timizing variational quantum algorithms using pontryagin’s minimum principle,”Phys. Rev. X, vol. 7, p. 021027, May 2017

    2017

  18. [18]

    Symbol detection in a MIMO wireless communication system using a fefet-coupled cmos ring oscillator array,

    H. Kumar Jadia, A. Ghosh, M. Hanif Ali, S. Farid Uddin, S. N, S. Man- dal, N. Raut, H. Mulaosmanovic, S. D ¨unkel, S. Beyer, S. Amonkar, U. Ganguly, V . Deshpande, and D. Bhowmik, “Symbol detection in a MIMO wireless communication system using a fefet-coupled cmos ring oscillator array,”Neuromorphic Computing and Engineering, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 014020, 2026

    2026

  19. [19]

    A Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm

    E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, “A quantum approximate optimization algorithm,” 2014. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1411.4028

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  20. [20]

    Quantum approximate optimization algorithm: Performance, mechanism, and im- plementation on near-term devices,

    L. Zhou, S.-T. Wang, S. Choi, H. Pichler, and M. D. Lukin, “Quantum approximate optimization algorithm: Performance, mechanism, and im- plementation on near-term devices,”Phys. Rev. X, vol. 10, p. 021067, Jun 2020

    2020

  21. [21]

    A review on quantum approximate optimization algorithm and its variants,

    K. Blekos, D. Brand, A. Ceschini, C.-H. Chou, R.-H. Li, K. Pandya, and A. Summer, “A review on quantum approximate optimization algorithm and its variants,”Physics Reports, vol. 1068, pp. 1–66, 2024, a review on Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm and its variants

    2024

  22. [22]

    Quantum approximate optimization algorithm based maximum likelihood detection,

    J. Cui, Y . Xiong, S. X. Ng, and L. Hanzo, “Quantum approximate optimization algorithm based maximum likelihood detection,”IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 5386–5400, 2022

    2022

  23. [23]

    Warm-starting quantum optimization,

    D. J. Egger, J. Mare ˇcek, and S. Woerner, “Warm-starting quantum optimization,”Quantum, vol. 5, p. 479, Jun. 2021

    2021

  24. [24]

    Maximum likelihood detection based on warm-start quantum optimization algorithm,

    X. He, H. Zeng, and X. Yu, “Maximum likelihood detection based on warm-start quantum optimization algorithm,” in2024 5th Information Communication Technologies Conference (ICTC), 2024, pp. 163–167

    2024

  25. [25]

    Maximum-likelihood detection with QAOA for massive MIMO and sherrington-kirkpatrick model with local field at infinite size,

    B. G ¨ulbahar, “Maximum-likelihood detection with QAOA for massive MIMO and sherrington-kirkpatrick model with local field at infinite size,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 11 567–11 579, 2024

    2024

  26. [26]

    Majority voting with recursive QAOA and cost-restricted uniform sampling for maximum-likelihood detection in massive MIMO,

    B.G ¨ulbahar, “Majority voting with recursive QAOA and cost-restricted uniform sampling for maximum-likelihood detection in massive MIMO,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 2620–2631, 2025

    2025

  27. [27]

    An efficient quantum approximate optimization algorithm with fixed linear ramp schedule for truss structure optimization,

    J. Xiao, N. Sukulthanasorn, R. Nomuraet al., “An efficient quantum approximate optimization algorithm with fixed linear ramp schedule for truss structure optimization,”Advanced Modeling and Simulation in Engineering Sciences, vol. 12, p. 14, 2025

    2025

  28. [28]

    Toward a linear-ramp qaoa protocol: evidence of a scaling advantage in solving some combinatorial optimization problems,

    J. A. Monta ˜nez-Barrera and K. Michielsen, “Toward a linear-ramp qaoa protocol: evidence of a scaling advantage in solving some combinatorial optimization problems,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 11, p. 131, 2025

    2025

  29. [29]

    Extrapolation method to optimize linear-ramp quantum approximate optimization algorithm parameters: Evaluation of runtime scaling,

    V . Dehn, M. Zaefferer, G. Hellstern, K. Jayadevan, F. Reiter, and T. Wellens, “Extrapolation method to optimize linear-ramp quantum approximate optimization algorithm parameters: Evaluation of runtime scaling,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 113, p. 032413, Mar 2026

    2026

  30. [30]

    Quantum computation and quantum information,

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, “Quantum computation and quantum information,” 2010

    2010

  31. [31]

    PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations

    V . Bergholm, J. Izaac, M. Schuldet al., “PennyLane: Automatic dif- ferentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968, 2018

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2018

  32. [32]

    A Semidefinite Relaxation Approach to MIMO Detection for High-Order QAM Constellations,

    N. Sidiropoulos and Z.-Q. Luo, “A Semidefinite Relaxation Approach to MIMO Detection for High-Order QAM Constellations,”IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 525–528, 2006

    2006

  33. [33]

    Convergence Rate of Block-Coordinate Maximization Burer-Monteiro Method for Solving Large SDPs,

    M. A. Erdogdu, A. Ozdaglar, P. A. Parrilo, and N. D. Vanli, “Convergence Rate of Block-Coordinate Maximization Burer-Monteiro Method for Solving Large SDPs,” 2019. [Online]. Available: https: //arxiv.org/abs/1807.04428

    work page arXiv 2019

  34. [34]

    Sedumi interface 1.02: a tool for solving lmi problems with sedumi,

    Y . Labit, D. Peaucelle, and D. Henrion, “Sedumi interface 1.02: a tool for solving lmi problems with sedumi,” inProceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Computer Aided Control System Design, 2002, pp. 272– 277

    2002

  35. [35]

    Mimo detection of 16-qam signaling based on semidefinite relaxation,

    Y . Yang, C. Zhao, P. Zhou, and W. Xu, “Mimo detection of 16-qam signaling based on semidefinite relaxation,”IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 797–800, 2007

    2007

  36. [36]

    Achieving near-capacity on a multiple- antenna channel,

    B. Hochwald and S. ten Brink, “Achieving near-capacity on a multiple- antenna channel,”IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 389–399, 2003

    2003

  37. [37]

    IBM Quantum Platform: Eagle r3 processor calibration data, Frankfurt region,

    IBM Quantum, “IBM Quantum Platform: Eagle r3 processor calibration data, Frankfurt region,” https://quantum.ibm.com, 2026, qPU version 1.3.142. Median calibration values (accessed March 31, 2026): SX gate errorp 1Q = 2.639×10 −4, ECR gate errorp 2Q = 8.401×10 −3, readout assignment errorp RO = 2.76×10 −2,T 1 = 247.6µs, T2 = 105.29µs, 127 qubits

    2026

  38. [38]

    IBM Quantum Platform: Fez processor (Heron r2) calibration data, Washington DC region,

    IBM QUANTUM, “IBM Quantum Platform: Fez processor (Heron r2) calibration data, Washington DC region,” https://quantum.ibm.com, 2026, qPU version 1.3.37. Median calibration values (accessed April 7, 2026): SX gate errorp 1Q = 2.835×10 −4, two-qubit gate error p2Q = 2.64×10 −3, readout assignment errorp RO = 1.35×10 −2, T1 = 127.93µs,T 2 = 94.68µs, 156 qubits

    2026