Scientific code generation can produce executable programs that fail to compute the intended scientific object. We study this problem in language-model synthesis of Clifford circuits, which prepare the stabilizer states used in quantum error correction and admit exact classical verification. In our target-conditioned framework, each target is given as compact signed stabilizer generators, and an exact verifier checks the generated OpenQASM circuits. We supervise models with Aaronson-Gottesman chain-of-thought (AG-CoT) traces checked by the verifier, and continue training on model generations that the verifier accepts. Across two independently trained model families (3B and 7B), AG-CoT supervision multiplies greedy-decode state-equivalence accuracy by four to six times over circuit-only baselines, and verifier-filtered continuation training adds a further consistent gain atop both. A complementary 32B study shows that supervised models achieve near-perfect syntax and Clifford validity while the strongest direct model reaches 6.14% state equivalence per target, rising to over 10% under verifier-guided selection with multiple candidates. These results show that algorithmic trace supervision gives a large, statistically significant gain in both model families and that verifier-filtered continuation adds a further repeated gain. The persistent gap between Clifford validity and state equivalence confirms that exact verification is necessary: a circuit can be syntactically and physically valid yet prepare the wrong quantum state.
Scientific code generation can produce executable programs that fail to compute the intended scientific object. We study this problem in language-model synthesis of Clifford circuits, which prepare the stabilizer states used in quantum error correction and admit exact classical verification. In our target-conditioned framework, each target is given as compact signed stabilizer generators, and an exact verifier checks the generated OpenQASM circuits. We supervise models with Aaronson-Gottesman chain-of-thought (AG-CoT) traces checked by the verifier, and continue training on model generations that the verifier accepts. Across two independently trained model families (3B and 7B), AG-CoT supervision multiplies greedy-decode state-equivalence accuracy by four to six times over circuit-only baselines, and verifier-filtered continuation training adds a further consistent gain atop both. A complementary 32B study shows that supervised models achieve near-perfect syntax and Clifford validity while the strongest direct model reaches 6.14% state equivalence per target, rising to over 10% under verifier-guided selection with multiple candidates. These results show that algorithmic trace supervision gives a large, statistically significant gain in both model families and that verifier-filtered continuation adds a further repeated gain. The persistent gap between Clifford validity and state equivalence confirms that exact verification is necessary: a circuit can be syntactically and physically valid yet prepare the wrong quantum state.
Quantum circuit optimization for fault-tolerant computing requires exact functional equivalence while minimizing expensive non-Clifford resources such as T gates. We study this problem using a compact 44.8M-parameter encoder-decoder transformer with structured circuit tokenization, evaluating on parameterized circuits (2-6 qubits) and Clifford+T circuits (3-6 qubits). On parameterized circuits, a hybrid approach -- structure from the transformer, angles from classical optimization -- achieves median fidelity 1.000 on 3-6 qubit circuits. On Clifford+T circuits, where all gates are discrete and no post-processing is possible, the model learns valid syntax and accurate T-Count statistics, yet exact equivalence degrades sharply with target length -- from 88% on circuits with <=9 gates to near zero beyond 26 gates.
We trace this failure to autoregressive drift: early-token divergence cascading irrecoverably through left-to-right decoding. Two levers partially mitigate the drift: inference-time strategies that generate multiple candidates and select via equivalence verification raise exact-match rates from 7% to 22.5%, while scaling training data by 2.5x pushes them to 39.5%. Yet the degradation with target length persists -- even with more data, exact equivalence drops from 94% on short circuits to under 4% beyond 26 gates.
The contrast between settings is our central finding: when approximate outputs can be rescued by post-processing, the transformer succeeds; when exact discrete correctness is required, autoregressive drift limits reliability, with both inference-time search and data scaling as effective levers while training-side fine-tuning and model-level diversification are not.
The scaling hypothesis assumes that increasing model parameters yields emergent reasoning capabilities. This position paper argues that applying this probabilistic paradigm to generic quantum circuit synthesis is a directional error. Unlike natural languages, quantum circuits require strict adherence to mathematical constraints that manifest a significant syntax-semantics gap. Training on unverified quantum programs means that models learn syntax but fail to capture the physical semantics of the Hilbert space. Since the valid subset of circuit designs decays exponentially with the number of qubits, post-hoc filtering is mathematically intractable. We propose a pivot from human-centric copilots to verifier-centric agents. We integrate hierarchical constraints, topological masks, and symbolic proxies directly into generation. Our analysis suggests that scale alone cannot bridge the validity gap. Verification-aware architectures offer a viable path for modular quantum program generation. These considerations point toward generation methods that encode task-specific rules of quantum information, rather than relying on imitation alone.
Can Large Language Models (LLMs) understand and reason about quantum operators? Despite their remarkable capabilities in mathematics and symbolic reasoning, LLMs remain inherently blind to quantum representations such as unitary matrices. In this work, we take a step toward bridging this gap by introducing an approach that maps unitary operators into the latent space of an LLM, enabling unified modeling over quantum and linguistic inputs. We instantiate this idea on Clifford+T circuit synthesis over a Pauli rotation gate set, where our model achieves results competitive with state-of-the-art methods and scales consistently with training data, with no signs of saturation. Our approach further enables language-conditioned synthesis, allowing gate constraints unseen during training to be specified directly in natural language. This work suggests a path toward quantum--aware foundation models that can natively interpret and reason about quantum operations, which could have broader implications reaching across quantum compilation and algorithm discovery.
As quantum hardware scales toward fault tolerant operation, the demand for correct quantum error correction (QEC) circuits far outpaces manual design capacity. AI agents offer a promising path to automating this synthesis, yet no benchmark exists to measure their progress on the specialized task of generating QEC circuits. We introduce StabilizerBench, a benchmark suite of 192 stabilizer codes spanning 12 families, 4-196 qubits, and distances 2-21, organized into three tasks of increasing difficulty: state preparation circuit generation, circuit optimization under semantic constraints, and fault tolerant circuit synthesis. Although motivated by QEC, stabilizer circuits exercise core competencies required for general quantum programming, including gate decomposition, qubit routing, and semantic preserving transformations, while admitting efficient verification via the Gottesman Knill theorem, enabling the benchmark to scale to large codes without the exponential cost of full unitary comparison. We define a unified generator weighted scoring system with two tiers: a capability score measuring breadth of success and a quality score capturing circuit merit. We also introduce continuous fault tolerance and optimization metrics that grade error resilience and circuit improvements beyond binary pass or fail. Following the design of classical benchmarks such as SWE-bench, StabilizerBench specifies inputs, verification oracles, and scoring but leaves prompts and agent strategies open. We evaluate three frontier AI agents and find the benchmark discriminates across models and tasks with substantial headroom for improvement.
We generalize the polynomial-time outcome-complete simulation algorithm for stabilizer circuits in arXiv:2309.08676 to track global phases exactly, yielding what we call phased outcome-complete simulation. The original algorithm enabled equivalence checking of stabilizer circuits with intermediate measurements and conditional Pauli corrections for all input states and all measurement outcomes simultaneously, but it tracked quantum states only up to a global phase. Our generalization removes this limitation and enables equivalence checking for an important family of non-stabilizer circuits: stabilizer circuits augmented with single-qubit rotations exp(iαZ) by symbolic angles. Two such circuits are equivalent if they implement the same quantum channel for all values of the symbolic angles and all measurement outcomes, given a one-to-one correspondence between rotation angles in the two circuits and a mapping between measurement outcomes. This model enables testing of compilation algorithms that transform the Clifford portions of a computation while preserving rotation angles. Examples include Pauli-based computation, edge-disjoint path compilation for surface codes, and custom compilation strategies for reversible circuits such as adders, multipliers, and table lookups. Our efficient classical verification methods extend naturally to circuits with outcome-parity-conditional Pauli gates and intermediate measurements, features that are ubiquitous in fault-tolerant quantum computing but are rarely addressed by existing equivalence-checking approaches.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as quantum coding copilots, assisting researchers by generating complex programs for frameworks such as Qiskit, PennyLane, and OpenQASM. However, accurately evaluating the practical utility of these models remains a significant challenge. Existing benchmarks are highly fragmented, ranging from syntax-centric unit tests to simulator- and hardware-aware metrics, making results difficult to compare across different languages and hardware targets. To address this fragmentation, this paper systematically reviews recent evaluation suites and post-training methodologies for quantum code generation. We distill current evaluation criteria into four practical dimensions: syntax and API validity, semantic and physical correctness, resource and hardware feasibility, and execution-based feedback. Building upon these dimensions, we present a unified taxonomy that maps current benchmarks to emerging model adaptation techniques, specifically retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), fine-tuning, multi-agent workflows, and reinforcement learning (RL). Our analysis highlights a clear shift: moving away from prompt-only baselines and toward agentic workflows driven by quantum-verifiable rewards. This shift directly targets the semantic gap between superficially compilable code and physically executable quantum programs. In addition, we identify key research opportunities-such as standardized semantic metrics and integration with quantum error correction-aimed at fostering a more reproducible, verifiable, and hardware-grounded ecosystem for automated quantum software development.