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:1905.05775 · Quantum Information Processing

Benchmarking quantum processors with a single qubit

Oktay Göktaş, W. K. Tham, Kent Bonsma-Fisher, Aharon Brodutch

Published Mar 18, 2020• 5 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1007/s11128-020-02642-4

Related papers

Single-qubit randomized benchmarking of flux-tuneable transmons: a test time analysis

Thorsten Last, Yevheniia Cheipesh, Konstantin Lehman +8 more

The qubit count of superconducting transmon-based quantum processors is steadily increasing. Some processors are already beyond the 100-qubit scale. In order to keep the development cadence of those quantum processors high, the test time per qubit needs to be strongly reduced from days to hours. Here we present a test time study based on extracting a single-qubit fidelity using a randomized benchmarking protocol. We show that more than a dozen other tune-up steps are required before a randomized benchmarking protocol can be executed on a qubit. En bloc, such a structured workflow leads to a test-time of about 20 mins per qubit. By extrapolating, we find that testing single-qubit fidelities on a hecto-qubit scale quantum chip using the randomized benchmarking protocol would take about 2.5 days. Executing the test protocol is furthermore embedded in a total test cycle that takes into account that a chip needs to be inserted, tested, and retrieved from the system, consisting of a cooldown to 20 mK base temperature and afterwards a warmup to ambient conditions. The whole process of chip testing, starting with insertion and ending with the retrieval of the quantum processor under test is estimated to take about a week. Considering the current state of technology, such a cadence in chip testing can be considered high throughput.

Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control XXXVI•Apr 10, 2024•1 citation

Benchmarking Quantum Computers

Robson Giles

•Jan 1, 2024•0 citations

Interleaved Benchmarking with Single-Qubit References

Ilya A. Simakov, Arina V. Zotova, Tatyana A. Chudakova +10 more

Cross-entropy benchmarking (XEB) with single-qubit reference sequences is widely used to characterize multi-qubit gates in large-scale quantum processors, despite the lack of a rigorous theoretical justification. Here we show that the commonly employed additive single-qubit errors approximation underlying this approach breaks down and leads to a systematic overestimation of gate fidelities. We derive an analytical expression for the joint decay of simultaneous single-qubit reference sequences, identify when interleaved circuits generate sufficient randomization for the standard depolarizing approximation, and obtain a refined expression for the interleaved gate fidelity estimation. Experiments on a superconducting quantum processor validate the theory and demonstrate that fidelities obtained using XEB with single-qubit references agree with those extracted from standard interleaved randomized benchmarking (IRB), while achieving higher precision due to reduced reference-sequence errors. Our results establish theoretical foundation for interleaved benchmarking protocols employing single-qubit reference sequences and show that, with appropriate post-processing, they provide a simple and accurate alternative to multi-qubit Clifford reference circuits.

quant-pharXiv:2603.05422•Mar 6, 2026•0 citations

Benchmarking of quantum processors with random circuits

James R. Wootton

Quantum processors with sizes in the 10-100 qubit range are now increasingly common. However, with increased size comes increased complexity for benchmarking. The effectiveness of a given device may vary greatly between different tasks, and will not always be easy to predict from single and two qubit gate fidelities. For this reason, it is important to assess processor quality for a range of important tasks. In this work we propose and implement tests based on random quantum circuits. These are used to evaluate multiple different superconducting qubit devices, with sizes from 5 to 19 qubits, from two hardware manufacturers: IBM Research and Rigetti. The data is analyzed to give a quantitive description of how the devices perform. We also describe how it can be used for a qualititive description accessible to the layperson, by being played as a game.

arXiv:1806.02736•Jun 7, 2018•10 citations

Benchmarking quantum computers

Timothy J Proctor, Kevin C Young, Andrew Baczewski +1 more

arXiv:2407.08828•Nature Reviews Physics•Jan 7, 2025•71 citations

Scalable and targeted benchmarking of quantum computers

Timothy J Proctor, Kenneth Rudinger, Mohan Sarovar +3 more

Bulletin of the American Physical Society•Mar 15, 2021•0 citations
The qubit count of superconducting transmon-based quantum processors is steadily increasing. Some processors are already beyond the 100-qubit scale. In order to keep the development cadence of those quantum processors high, the test time per qubit needs to be strongly reduced from days to hours. Here we present a test time study based on extracting a single-qubit fidelity using a randomized benchmarking protocol. We show that more than a dozen other tune-up steps are required before a randomized benchmarking protocol can be executed on a qubit. En bloc, such a structured workflow leads to a test-time of about 20 mins per qubit. By extrapolating, we find that testing single-qubit fidelities on a hecto-qubit scale quantum chip using the randomized benchmarking protocol would take about 2.5 days. Executing the test protocol is furthermore embedded in a total test cycle that takes into account that a chip needs to be inserted, tested, and retrieved from the system, consisting of a cooldown to 20 mK base temperature and afterwards a warmup to ambient conditions. The whole process of chip testing, starting with insertion and ending with the retrieval of the quantum processor under test is estimated to take about a week. Considering the current state of technology, such a cadence in chip testing can be considered high throughput.
Cross-entropy benchmarking (XEB) with single-qubit reference sequences is widely used to characterize multi-qubit gates in large-scale quantum processors, despite the lack of a rigorous theoretical justification. Here we show that the commonly employed additive single-qubit errors approximation underlying this approach breaks down and leads to a systematic overestimation of gate fidelities. We derive an analytical expression for the joint decay of simultaneous single-qubit reference sequences, identify when interleaved circuits generate sufficient randomization for the standard depolarizing approximation, and obtain a refined expression for the interleaved gate fidelity estimation. Experiments on a superconducting quantum processor validate the theory and demonstrate that fidelities obtained using XEB with single-qubit references agree with those extracted from standard interleaved randomized benchmarking (IRB), while achieving higher precision due to reduced reference-sequence errors. Our results establish theoretical foundation for interleaved benchmarking protocols employing single-qubit reference sequences and show that, with appropriate post-processing, they provide a simple and accurate alternative to multi-qubit Clifford reference circuits.
Quantum processors with sizes in the 10-100 qubit range are now increasingly common. However, with increased size comes increased complexity for benchmarking. The effectiveness of a given device may vary greatly between different tasks, and will not always be easy to predict from single and two qubit gate fidelities. For this reason, it is important to assess processor quality for a range of important tasks. In this work we propose and implement tests based on random quantum circuits. These are used to evaluate multiple different superconducting qubit devices, with sizes from 5 to 19 qubits, from two hardware manufacturers: IBM Research and Rigetti. The data is analyzed to give a quantitive description of how the devices perform. We also describe how it can be used for a qualititive description accessible to the layperson, by being played as a game.