Recently, there has been an emergence of useful applications for noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices notably, though not exclusively, in the fields of quantum machine learning and variational quantum algorithms. In such applications, circuits of various depths and composed of different sets of gates are run on NISQ devices. Therefore, it is crucial to find practical ways to capture the general performance of circuits on these devices. Motivated by this pressing need, we modified the standard Clifford randomized benchmarking (RB) and interleaved RB schemes targeting them to hardware limitations. Firstly we remove the requirement for, and assumptions on, the inverse operator, in Clifford RB by incorporating a tehchnique from quantum verification. This introduces another figure of merit by which to assess the quality of the NISQ hardware, namely the acceptance probability of quantum verification. Many quantum algorithms, that provide an advantage over classical algorithms, demand the use of Clifford as well as non-Clifford gates. Therefore, as our second contribution we develop a technique for characterising a variety of non-Clifford gates, by combining tools from gate synthesis with interleaved RB. Both of our techniques are most relevant when used in conjunction with RB schemes that benchmark generators (or native gates) of the Clifford group, and in low error regimes.
Recently, there has been an emergence of useful applications for noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices notably, though not exclusively, in the fields of quantum machine learning and variational quantum algorithms. In such applications, circuits of various depths and composed of different sets of gates are run on NISQ devices. Therefore, it is crucial to find practical ways to capture the general performance of circuits on these devices. Motivated by this pressing need, we modified the standard Clifford randomized benchmarking (RB) and interleaved RB schemes targeting them to hardware limitations. Firstly we remove the requirement for, and assumptions on, the inverse operator, in Clifford RB by incorporating a tehchnique from quantum verification. This introduces another figure of merit by which to assess the quality of the NISQ hardware, namely the acceptance probability of quantum verification. Many quantum algorithms, that provide an advantage over classical algorithms, demand the use of Clifford as well as non-Clifford gates. Therefore, as our second contribution we develop a technique for characterising a variety of non-Clifford gates, by combining tools from gate synthesis with interleaved RB. Both of our techniques are most relevant when used in conjunction with RB schemes that benchmark generators (or native gates) of the Clifford group, and in low error regimes.
Characterization of experimental systems is an essential step in developing and improving quantum hardware. A collection of protocols known as Randomized Benchmarking (RB) was developed in the past decade, which provides an efficient way to measure error rates in quantum systems. In a recent paper (arxiv:2010.07974), a general framework for RB was proposed, which encompassed most of the known RB protocols and overcame the limitation on error models in previous works. However, even this general framework has a restriction: it can only be applied to a finite group of gates. This does not meet the need posed by experiments, in particular the demand for benchmarking non-Clifford gates and continuous gate sets on quantum devices. In this work we generalize the RB framework to continuous groups of gates and show that as long as the noise level is reasonably small, the output can be approximated as a linear combination of matrix exponential decays. As an application, we numerically study the fully randomized benchmarking protocol (i.e. RB with the entire unitary group as the gate set) enabled by our proof. This provides a unified way to estimate the gate fidelity for any quantum gate in an experiment.
Randomised benchmarking is a widely used experimental technique to characterise the average error of quantum operations. Benchmarking procedures that scale to enable the characterisation of n-qubit circuits rely on efficient procedures for manipulating those circuits and, as such, have been limited to subgroups of the Clifford group. However, universal quantum computers require additional, non-Clifford gates to approximate arbitrary unitary transformations. We define a scalable randomised benchmarking procedure over n-qubit unitary matrices that correspond to protected non-Clifford gates for a class of stabiliser codes. We present efficient methods for representing and composing group elements, sampling them uniformly and synthesising corresponding poly(n)-sized circuits. The procedure provides experimental access to two independent parameters that together characterise the average gate fidelity of a group element. A scalable procedure to determine the error of quantum operations has been developed by researchers in the United States. Andrew Cross and colleagues at the IBM T.J. Watson Research Center have expanded previously used protocols to a broader range of quantum circuits, thereby enabling error benchmarking for all common logical operations used in leading quantum computing protocols. The standard technique for error characterization in these devices is randomized benchmarking, which provides benefits such as insensitivity to measurement errors, but on the other hand only functions in a limited number of circumstances. In their theoretical study, the researchers demonstrate how randomized benchmarking approaches can be expanded to a much broader range of logical operations. The procedure can be readily implemented experimentally, and provides access to important experimental noise parameters in quantum computing.
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.
Accurate benchmarking of quantum gates is crucial for understanding and enhancing the performance of quantum hardware. A standard method for this is interleaved benchmarking, a technique which estimates the error on an interleaved target gate by comparing cumulative error rates of randomized sequences implemented with the interleaved gate and without it. In this work, we show both numerically and experimentally that the standard approach of interleaved randomized benchmarking (IRB), which uses the multi-qubit Clifford group for randomization, can produce highly inaccurate and even physically impossible estimates for the error on the interleaved gate in the presence of coherent errors. Fortunately we also show that interleaved benchmarking performed with cycle benchmarking, which randomizes with single qubit Pauli gates, provides dramatically reduced systematic uncertainty relative to standard IRB, and further provides as host of additional benefits including data reusability. We support our conclusions with a theoretical framework for bounding systematic errors, extensive numerical results comparing a range of interleaved protocols under fixed resource costs, and experimental demonstrations on three quantum computing platforms.
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.
Quantum computers have the potential to bring about a new age of technology, but in order for them to become a reality, the elephant in the room must be addressed, quantum errors. The complexity of quantum errors grows exponentially as the system size is increased; scalable characterization protocols which work under physically realistic noise are therefore needed to assess and optimize control. \n \nRandomized Benchmarking (RB) is a family of characterization protocols with the requisite qualities. RB protocols are independent of state preparation and measurement (SPAM) errors, and because they extract partial information about the error profiles in the form of figures of merit, they are scalable in the number of qubits. In this thesis, we study these figures of merit under various error models, gate-sets, and sample distributions, to further our understanding of their physical meaning, and to fine-tune the best practice for diagnosing errors in basic gate-sets. \n \nThe first study presented in this thesis looks at the physical meaning of the unitarity under physically realistic gate-dependent noise. Numerically, we demonstrate that under these realistic noise models, the unitarity obtained via Extended RB (XRB) overlaps strongly with the average of the unitarity of the errors over the set of individual operations. \n \nThe second study numerically and analytically proves that the Standard RB (SRB) decay parameter p coincides with the decay parameter of the novel figure of merit gate-set circuit fidelity. We also prove that, in the limit of high-fidelity single-qubit experiments, the disconnect between the average gate fidelity and SRB experimental results is caused by a basis mismatch between the gates and the state-preparation and measurement procedures. \n \nIn the third part of this thesis, we compare the results of two variations of the SRB protocol, one that samples uniformly (SRB) and one that samples non-uniformly (NIST RB) from the Clifford group. We prove that NIST RB produces an exponential fidelity curve that gives different infidelity results than SRB. \n \nThe fourth and final study gives a standard for assessing basic gate-sets. Experimental results are given from the assessment run on super-conducting and ion-trap devices. We also experimentally show how the systematic error bounds can be tightened by accounting for the error's degree of coherence, as well as using weaker randomizing sets.