Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1807.07975 · Physical Review Letters

Direct Randomized Benchmarking for Multiqubit Devices

Timothy J Proctor, Arnaud Carignan-Dugas, Kenneth Rudinger, Erik Nielsen, Robin Blume-Kohout, Kevin C Young

Published Jul 19, 2019• 118 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Benchmarking methods that can be adapted to multiqubit systems are essential for assessing the overall or "holistic" performance of nascent quantum processors. The current industry standard is Clifford randomized benchmarking (RB), which measures a single error rate that quantifies overall performance. But, scaling Clifford RB to many qubits is surprisingly hard. It has only been performed on one, two, and three qubits as of this writing. This reflects a fundamental inefficiency in Clifford RB: the n-qubit Clifford gates at its core have to be compiled into large circuits over the one- and two-qubit gates native to a device. As n grows, the quality of these Clifford gates quickly degrades, making Clifford RB impractical at relatively low n. In this Letter, we propose a direct RB protocol that mostly avoids compiling. Instead, it uses random circuits over the native gates in a device, which are seeded by an initial layer of Clifford-like randomization. We demonstrate this protocol experimentally on two to five qubits using the publicly available ibmqx5. We believe this to be the greatest number of qubits holistically benchmarked, and this was achieved on a freely available device without any special tuning up. Our protocol retains the simplicity and convenient properties of Clifford RB: it estimates an error rate from an exponential decay. But, it can be extended to processors with more qubits-we present simulations on 10+ qubits-and it reports a more directly informative and flexible error rate than the one reported by Clifford RB. We show how to use this flexibility to measure separate error rates for distinct sets of gates, and we use this method to estimate the average error rate of a set of cnot gates.

DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.123.030503

Related papers

A Theory of Direct Randomized Benchmarking

Anthony Polloreno, Arnaud Carignan-Dugas, Jordan Hines +3 more

Randomized benchmarking (RB) protocols are widely used to measure an average error rate for a set of quantum logic gates. However, the standard version of RB is limited because it only benchmarks a processor's native gates indirectly, by using them in composite n -qubit Clifford gates. Standard RB's reliance on n -qubit Clifford gates restricts it to the few-qubit regime, because the fidelity of a typical composite n -qubit Clifford gate decreases rapidly with increasing n . Furthermore, although standard RB is often used to infer the error rate of native gates, by rescaling standard RB's error per Clifford to an error per native gate, this is an unreliable extrapolation. Direct RB is a method that addresses these limitations of standard RB, by directly benchmarking a customizable gate set, such as a processor's native gates. Here we provide a detailed introduction to direct RB, we discuss how to design direct RB experiments, and we present two complementary theories for direct RB. The first of these theories uses the concept of error propagation or scrambling in random circuits to show that direct RB is reliable for gates that experience stochastic Pauli errors. We prove that the direct RB decay is a single exponential, and that the decay rate is equal to the average infidelity of the benchmarked gates, under broad circumstances. This theory shows that group twirling is not required for reliable RB. Our second theory proves that direct RB is reliable for gates that experience general gate-dependent Markovian errors, using similar techniques to contemporary theories for standard RB. Our two theories for direct RB have complementary regimes of applicability, and they provide complementary perspectives on why direct RB works. Together these theories provide comprehensive guarantees on the reliability of direct RB.

arXiv:2302.13853•Quantum•Sep 5, 2025•5 citations

Demonstrating Scalable Randomized Benchmarking of Universal Gate Sets

Jordan Hines, Marie Lu, Ravi Naik +12 more

Randomized benchmarking (RB) protocols are the most widely used methods for assessing the performance of quantum gates.However, the existing RB methods either do not scale to many qubits or cannot benchmark a universal gate set.Here, we introduce and demonstrate a technique for scalable RB of many universal and continuously parametrized gate sets, using a class of circuits called randomized mirror circuits.Our technique can be applied to a gate set containing an entangling Clifford gate and the set of arbitrary single-qubit gates, as well as gate sets containing controlled rotations about the Pauli axes.We use our technique to benchmark universal gate sets on four qubits of the Advanced Quantum Testbed, including a gate set containing a controlled-S gate and its inverse, and we investigate how the observed error rate is impacted by the inclusion of non-Clifford gates.Finally, we demonstrate that our technique scales to many qubits with experiments on a 27-qubit IBM Q processor.We use our technique to quantify the impact of crosstalk on this 27-qubit device, and we find that it contributes approximately 2=3 of the total error per gate in random many-qubit circuit layers.

arXiv:2207.07272•Physical Review X•Nov 14, 2023•24 citations

Multiqubit randomized benchmarking using few samples

Jonas Helsen, Joel J. Wallman, Steven T. Flammia +1 more

Randomized benchmarking (RB) is an efficient and robust method to characterize gate errors in quantum circuits. Averaging over random sequences of gates leads to estimates of gate errors in terms of the average fidelity. These estimates are isolated from the state preparation and measurement errors that plague other methods such as channel tomography and direct fidelity estimation. A decisive factor in the feasibility of randomized benchmarking is the number of sampled sequences required to obtain rigorous confidence intervals. Previous bounds were either prohibitively loose or required the number of sampled sequences to scale exponentially with the number of qubits in order to obtain a fixed confidence interval at a fixed error rate. Here, we show that, with a small adaptation to the randomized benchmarking procedure, the number of sampled sequences required for a fixed confidence interval is dramatically smaller than could previously be justified. In particular, we show that the number of sampled sequences required is essentially independent of the number of qubits and scales favorably with the average error rate of the system under investigation. We also investigate the fitting procedure inherent to randomized benchmarking in light of our results and find that standard methods such as ordinary least squares optimization can give misleading results. We therefore recommend moving to more sophisticated fitting methods such as iteratively reweighted least squares optimization. Our results bring rigorous randomized benchmarking on systems with many qubits into the realm of experimental feasibility.

arXiv:1701.04299•Physical Review A•Sep 3, 2019•49 citations

Three-Qubit Randomized Benchmarking

David C. McKay, Sarah Sheldon, John A. Smolin +2 more

As quantum circuits increase in size, it is critical to establish scalable multiqubit fidelity metrics. Here we investigate, for the first time, three-qubit randomized benchmarking (RB) on a quantum device consisting of three fixed-frequency transmon qubits with pairwise microwave-activated interactions (cross-resonance). We measure a three-qubit error per Clifford of 0.106 for all-to-all gate connectivity and 0.207 for linear gate connectivity. Furthermore, by introducing mixed dimensionality simultaneous RB-simultaneous one- and two-qubit RB-we show that the three-qubit errors can be predicted from the one- and two-qubit errors. However, by introducing certain coherent errors to the gates, we can increase the three-qubit error to 0.302, an increase that is not predicted by a proportionate increase in the one- and two-qubit errors from simultaneous RB. This demonstrates the importance of multiqubit metrics, such as three-qubit RB, on evaluating overall device performance.

arXiv:1712.06550•Physical Review Letters•May 23, 2019•155 citations

What Randomized Benchmarking Actually Measures

Timothy J Proctor, Kenneth Rudinger, Kevin C Young +2 more

Randomized benchmarking (RB) is widely used to measure an error rate of a set of quantum gates, by performing random circuits that would do nothing if the gates were perfect. In the limit of no finite-sampling error, the exponential decay rate of the observable survival probabilities, versus circuit length, yields a single error metric r. For Clifford gates with arbitrary small errors described by process matrices, r was believed to reliably correspond to the mean, over all Clifford gates, of the average gate infidelity between the imperfect gates and their ideal counterparts. We show that this quantity is not a well-defined property of a physical gate set. It depends on the representations used for the imperfect and ideal gates, and the variant typically computed in the literature can differ from r by orders of magnitude. We present new theories of the RB decay that are accurate for all small errors describable by process matrices, and show that the RB decay curve is a simple exponential for all such errors. These theories allow explicit computation of the error rate that RB measures (r), but as far as we can tell it does not correspond to the infidelity of a physically allowed (completely positive) representation of the imperfect gates.

arXiv:1702.01853•Physical Review Letters•Sep 28, 2017•122 citations

Scalable Randomized Benchmarking of Quantum Computers Using Mirror Circuits

Timothy J Proctor, Stefan Seritan, Kenneth Rudinger +3 more

The performance of quantum gates is often assessed using some form of randomized benchmarking. However, the existing methods become infeasible for more than approximately five qubits. Here we show how to use a simple and customizable class of circuits-randomized mirror circuits-to perform scalable, robust, and flexible randomized benchmarking of Clifford gates. We show that this technique approximately estimates the infidelity of an average many-qubit logic layer, and we use simulations of up to 225 qubits with physically realistic error rates in the range 0.1%-1% to demonstrate its scalability. We then use up to 16 physical qubits of a cloud quantum computing platform to demonstrate that our technique can reveal and quantify crosstalk errors in many-qubit circuits.

arXiv:2112.09853•Physical Review Letters•Oct 6, 2022•68 citations
Benchmarking methods that can be adapted to multiqubit systems are essential for assessing the overall or "holistic" performance of nascent quantum processors. The current industry standard is Clifford randomized benchmarking (RB), which measures a single error rate that quantifies overall performance. But, scaling Clifford RB to many qubits is surprisingly hard. It has only been performed on one, two, and three qubits as of this writing. This reflects a fundamental inefficiency in Clifford RB: the n-qubit Clifford gates at its core have to be compiled into large circuits over the one- and two-qubit gates native to a device. As n grows, the quality of these Clifford gates quickly degrades, making Clifford RB impractical at relatively low n. In this Letter, we propose a direct RB protocol that mostly avoids compiling. Instead, it uses random circuits over the native gates in a device, which are seeded by an initial layer of Clifford-like randomization. We demonstrate this protocol experimentally on two to five qubits using the publicly available ibmqx5. We believe this to be the greatest number of qubits holistically benchmarked, and this was achieved on a freely available device without any special tuning up. Our protocol retains the simplicity and convenient properties of Clifford RB: it estimates an error rate from an exponential decay. But, it can be extended to processors with more qubits-we present simulations on 10+ qubits-and it reports a more directly informative and flexible error rate than the one reported by Clifford RB. We show how to use this flexibility to measure separate error rates for distinct sets of gates, and we use this method to estimate the average error rate of a set of cnot gates.
Randomized benchmarking (RB) protocols are widely used to measure an average error rate for a set of quantum logic gates. However, the standard version of RB is limited because it only benchmarks a processor's native gates indirectly, by using them in composite n -qubit Clifford gates. Standard RB's reliance on n -qubit Clifford gates restricts it to the few-qubit regime, because the fidelity of a typical composite n -qubit Clifford gate decreases rapidly with increasing n . Furthermore, although standard RB is often used to infer the error rate of native gates, by rescaling standard RB's error per Clifford to an error per native gate, this is an unreliable extrapolation. Direct RB is a method that addresses these limitations of standard RB, by directly benchmarking a customizable gate set, such as a processor's native gates. Here we provide a detailed introduction to direct RB, we discuss how to design direct RB experiments, and we present two complementary theories for direct RB. The first of these theories uses the concept of error propagation or scrambling in random circuits to show that direct RB is reliable for gates that experience stochastic Pauli errors. We prove that the direct RB decay is a single exponential, and that the decay rate is equal to the average infidelity of the benchmarked gates, under broad circumstances. This theory shows that group twirling is not required for reliable RB. Our second theory proves that direct RB is reliable for gates that experience general gate-dependent Markovian errors, using similar techniques to contemporary theories for standard RB. Our two theories for direct RB have complementary regimes of applicability, and they provide complementary perspectives on why direct RB works. Together these theories provide comprehensive guarantees on the reliability of direct RB.
Randomized benchmarking (RB) protocols are the most widely used methods for assessing the performance of quantum gates.However, the existing RB methods either do not scale to many qubits or cannot benchmark a universal gate set.Here, we introduce and demonstrate a technique for scalable RB of many universal and continuously parametrized gate sets, using a class of circuits called randomized mirror circuits.Our technique can be applied to a gate set containing an entangling Clifford gate and the set of arbitrary single-qubit gates, as well as gate sets containing controlled rotations about the Pauli axes.We use our technique to benchmark universal gate sets on four qubits of the Advanced Quantum Testbed, including a gate set containing a controlled-S gate and its inverse, and we investigate how the observed error rate is impacted by the inclusion of non-Clifford gates.Finally, we demonstrate that our technique scales to many qubits with experiments on a 27-qubit IBM Q processor.We use our technique to quantify the impact of crosstalk on this 27-qubit device, and we find that it contributes approximately 2=3 of the total error per gate in random many-qubit circuit layers.
Randomized benchmarking (RB) is an efficient and robust method to characterize gate errors in quantum circuits. Averaging over random sequences of gates leads to estimates of gate errors in terms of the average fidelity. These estimates are isolated from the state preparation and measurement errors that plague other methods such as channel tomography and direct fidelity estimation. A decisive factor in the feasibility of randomized benchmarking is the number of sampled sequences required to obtain rigorous confidence intervals. Previous bounds were either prohibitively loose or required the number of sampled sequences to scale exponentially with the number of qubits in order to obtain a fixed confidence interval at a fixed error rate. Here, we show that, with a small adaptation to the randomized benchmarking procedure, the number of sampled sequences required for a fixed confidence interval is dramatically smaller than could previously be justified. In particular, we show that the number of sampled sequences required is essentially independent of the number of qubits and scales favorably with the average error rate of the system under investigation. We also investigate the fitting procedure inherent to randomized benchmarking in light of our results and find that standard methods such as ordinary least squares optimization can give misleading results. We therefore recommend moving to more sophisticated fitting methods such as iteratively reweighted least squares optimization. Our results bring rigorous randomized benchmarking on systems with many qubits into the realm of experimental feasibility.
As quantum circuits increase in size, it is critical to establish scalable multiqubit fidelity metrics. Here we investigate, for the first time, three-qubit randomized benchmarking (RB) on a quantum device consisting of three fixed-frequency transmon qubits with pairwise microwave-activated interactions (cross-resonance). We measure a three-qubit error per Clifford of 0.106 for all-to-all gate connectivity and 0.207 for linear gate connectivity. Furthermore, by introducing mixed dimensionality simultaneous RB-simultaneous one- and two-qubit RB-we show that the three-qubit errors can be predicted from the one- and two-qubit errors. However, by introducing certain coherent errors to the gates, we can increase the three-qubit error to 0.302, an increase that is not predicted by a proportionate increase in the one- and two-qubit errors from simultaneous RB. This demonstrates the importance of multiqubit metrics, such as three-qubit RB, on evaluating overall device performance.
Randomized benchmarking (RB) is widely used to measure an error rate of a set of quantum gates, by performing random circuits that would do nothing if the gates were perfect. In the limit of no finite-sampling error, the exponential decay rate of the observable survival probabilities, versus circuit length, yields a single error metric r. For Clifford gates with arbitrary small errors described by process matrices, r was believed to reliably correspond to the mean, over all Clifford gates, of the average gate infidelity between the imperfect gates and their ideal counterparts. We show that this quantity is not a well-defined property of a physical gate set. It depends on the representations used for the imperfect and ideal gates, and the variant typically computed in the literature can differ from r by orders of magnitude. We present new theories of the RB decay that are accurate for all small errors describable by process matrices, and show that the RB decay curve is a simple exponential for all such errors. These theories allow explicit computation of the error rate that RB measures (r), but as far as we can tell it does not correspond to the infidelity of a physically allowed (completely positive) representation of the imperfect gates.
The performance of quantum gates is often assessed using some form of randomized benchmarking. However, the existing methods become infeasible for more than approximately five qubits. Here we show how to use a simple and customizable class of circuits-randomized mirror circuits-to perform scalable, robust, and flexible randomized benchmarking of Clifford gates. We show that this technique approximately estimates the infidelity of an average many-qubit logic layer, and we use simulations of up to 225 qubits with physically realistic error rates in the range 0.1%-1% to demonstrate its scalability. We then use up to 16 physical qubits of a cloud quantum computing platform to demonstrate that our technique can reveal and quantify crosstalk errors in many-qubit circuits.