Abstract Contemporary methods for benchmarking noisy quantum processors typically measure average error rates or process infidelities. However, thresholds for fault-tolerant quantum error correction are given in terms of worst-case error rates—defined via the diamond norm—which can differ from average error rates by orders of magnitude. One method for resolving this discrepancy is to randomize the physical implementation of quantum gates, using techniques like randomized compiling (RC). In this work, we use gate set tomography to perform precision characterization of a set of two-qubit logic gates to study RC on a superconducting quantum processor. We find that, under RC, gate errors are accurately described by a stochastic Pauli noise model without coherent errors, and that spatially correlated coherent errors and non-Markovian errors are strongly suppressed. We further show that the average and worst-case error rates are equal for randomly compiled gates, and measure a maximum worst-case error of 0.0197(3) for our gate set. Our results show that randomized benchmarks are a viable route to both verifying that a quantum processor’s error rates are below a fault-tolerance threshold, and to bounding the failure rates of near-term algorithms, if—and only if—gates are implemented via randomization methods which tailor noise.
Abstract Contemporary methods for benchmarking noisy quantum processors typically measure average error rates or process infidelities. However, thresholds for fault-tolerant quantum error correction are given in terms of worst-case error rates—defined via the diamond norm—which can differ from average error rates by orders of magnitude. One method for resolving this discrepancy is to randomize the physical implementation of quantum gates, using techniques like randomized compiling (RC). In this work, we use gate set tomography to perform precision characterization of a set of two-qubit logic gates to study RC on a superconducting quantum processor. We find that, under RC, gate errors are accurately described by a stochastic Pauli noise model without coherent errors, and that spatially correlated coherent errors and non-Markovian errors are strongly suppressed. We further show that the average and worst-case error rates are equal for randomly compiled gates, and measure a maximum worst-case error of 0.0197(3) for our gate set. Our results show that randomized benchmarks are a viable route to both verifying that a quantum processor’s error rates are below a fault-tolerance threshold, and to bounding the failure rates of near-term algorithms, if—and only if—gates are implemented via randomization methods which tailor noise.
The promise of quantum computing with imperfect qubits relies on the ability of a quantum computing system to scale cheaply through error correction and fault tolerance. While fault tolerance requires relatively mild assumptions about the nature of qubit errors, the overhead associated with coherent and non-Markovian errors can be orders of magnitude larger than the overhead associated with purely stochastic Markovian errors. One proposal to address this challenge is to randomize the circuits of interest, shaping the errors to be stochastic Pauli errors but leaving the aggregate computation unaffected. The randomization technique can also suppress couplings to slow degrees of freedom associated with non-Markovian evolution. Here, we demonstrate the implementation of Pauli-frame randomization in a superconducting circuit system, exploiting a flexible programming and control infrastructure to achieve this with low effort. We use high-accuracy gate-set tomography to characterize in detail the properties of the circuit error, with and without the randomization procedure, which allows us to make rigorous statements about Markovianity as well as the nature of the observed errors. We demonstrate that randomization suppresses signatures of non-Markovian evolution to statistically insignificant levels, from a Markovian model violation ranging from $43\ensuremath{\sigma}$ to $1987\ensuremath{\sigma}$, down to violations between $0.3\ensuremath{\sigma}$ and $2.7\ensuremath{\sigma}$ under randomization. Moreover, we demonstrate that, under randomization, the experimental errors are well described by a Pauli error model, with model violations that are similarly insignificant (between $0.8\ensuremath{\sigma}$ and $2.7\ensuremath{\sigma}$). Importantly, all these improvements in the model accuracy were obtained without degradation to fidelity, and with some improvements to error rates as quantified by the diamond norm. This demonstrates the ability of Pauli-frame randomization to shape noise into forms that are more benign for quantum error correction and fault tolerance.
The successful implementation of algorithms on quantum processors relies on the accurate control of quantum bits (qubits) to perform logic gate operations. In this era of noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) computing, systematic miscalibrations, drift, and crosstalk in the control of qubits can lead to a coherent form of error that has no classical analog. Coherent errors severely limit the performance of quantum algorithms in an unpredictable manner, and mitigating their impact is necessary for realizing reliable quantum computations. Moreover, the average error rates measured by randomized benchmarking and related protocols are not sensitive to the full impact of coherent errors and therefore do not reliably predict the global performance of quantum algorithms, leaving us unprepared to validate the accuracy of future large-scale quantum computations. Randomized compiling is a protocol designed to overcome these performance limitations by converting coherent errors into stochastic noise, dramatically reducing unpredictable errors in quantum algorithms and enabling accurate predictions of algorithmic performance from error rates measured via cycle benchmarking. In this work, we demonstrate significant performance gains under randomized compiling for the four-qubit quantum Fourier transform algorithm and for random circuits of variable depth on a superconducting quantum processor. Additionally, we accurately predict algorithm performance using experimentally measured error rates. Our results demonstrate that randomized compiling can be utilized to leverage and predict the capabilities of modern-day noisy quantum processors, paving the way forward for scalable quantum computing.
Gate fidelity -- an average fidelity over all possible input states -- is the workhorse metric for benchmarking quantum gates or circuits, yet fault-tolerant quantum computing ultimately depends on the worst-case behavior, typically quantifiable by so-called the diamond distance. In the low-error regime, the coherent errors can inflate the worst-case error even when the reported gate fidelity is high, making the gate fidelity alone an unreliable proxy for fault-tolerance readiness. To capture the missing information, we introduce a companion observable -- what we dub the fidelity deviation -- that quantifies how strongly the state-dependent fidelities fluctuate across input states. Adopting such fluctuations in assessing the fault-tolerance is physically natural because some input directions are nearly unaffected while others form narrow "valleys" that dominate adversarial circuit behavior. For coherent (unitary) gate errors on two or more qubits, we show that the gate fidelity together with the fidelity deviation constrains the relevant spectral moments of the error unitary, enabling an explicit and tight certificate of the worst-case error. Both quantities are estimated directly from the same randomized input-measurement experiment, without full process tomography. We show that the fidelity and its deviation can provide an economical, operationally meaningful, and accurate standard for assessing the fault tolerance of the engineered quantum gates and circuits.
In this thesis, we are concerned with the problem of characterizing noise associated with implementations of quantum circuits. We first explore the notion of error rates of quantum circuits and argue that the semantic distinction between process fidelity as “average error rate” and diamond distance as “worst-case error rate” is wrong. To this end, we analyze their worst-case and average analogies, and show they are proportional to their original measures. We show that the non-unital contributions to the diamond distance are negligible and the discrepancy between the process fidelity and diamond distance is primarily due to unitary errors. \n \nWe then turn to a new analysis of cycle benchmarking, a randomized benchmarking-like protocol to estimate the process fidelity of a cycle as engineered by randomized compiling. Using this approach, we prove that gate-dependent noise on the randomized gates is de- scribed by a single perturbation term that decays rapidly as long as the implementation is close to a representation. We also comment on how the protocol can be extended to qudits, what the cycle benchmarking decay actually measures, and how our analysis is amenable to the Fourier analysis of randomized benchmarking. We end with a discussion of how the gate-dependent cycle benchmarking process fidelity relates to gate-dependent randomized compiling.
Current hardware for quantum computing suffers from high levels of noise, and so to achieve practical fault-tolerant quantum computing will require powerful and efficient methods to correct for errors in quantum circuits. Here, we explore the role and effectiveness of using noise tailoring techniques to improve the performance of error correcting codes. Noise tailoring methods such as randomized compiling (RC) convert complex coherent noise processes to effective stochastic noise. While it is known that this can be leveraged to design efficient diagnostic tools, we explore its impact on the performance of error correcting codes. Of particular interest is the important class of coherent errors, arising from control errors, where RC has the maximum effect---converting these into purely stochastic errors. For these errors, we show here that RC delivers an improvement in performance of the concatenated Steane code by several orders of magnitude. We also show that below a threshold rotation angle, the gains in logical fidelity can be arbitrarily magnified by increasing the size of the codes. These results suggest that using randomized compiling can lead to a significant reduction in the resource overhead required to achieve fault tolerance.
Quantum error correction (QEC) can strongly suppress noise, but predicting whether a computation succeeds requires understanding not only how much effective noise persists after QEC, but what form that noise takes. To thoroughly characterize this noise, we introduce logical gate set tomography (``logical GST''). Logical GST produces detailed representations of noisy logical operations that can be used to derive higher-level metrics, such as gate fidelity and diamond distance, and to test for non-Markovian and coherent logical errors. We use logical GST to obtain the first full, self-consistent characterization of a universal single-qubit logical gate set, implemented in the seven-qubit Steane code using Quantinuum System Model H1, a 20-qubit trapped-ion quantum processor. In the experimental data from H1, logical GST identified predominantly logical Pauli-stochastic errors, found no evidence of logical non-Markovianity, and detected weak potential signatures of coherent logical error. By contrast, higher-shot datasets generated with Quantinuum's detailed system emulator, identify mechanisms for weak but statistically significant logical non-Markovianity and strong evidence of coherent logical error. Finally, we use logical GST to perform error attribution with the system emulator, revealing how specific physical error sources shape logical error mechanisms.