arXiv:2610.39406
QSoftCore: A Conceptual Foundation for Quantum Software Engineering
Tao Yue, Yuechen Li, Man Zhang
Abstract
Quantum software engineering (QSE) requires understanding application requirements, quantum programs and algorithms, quantum computation paradigms, executions, and deployment. However, relevant quantum computing (QC) concepts are often defined across physical, mathematical, and paradigm-specific levels of abstraction, making it difficult for the QSE community and hence proposed methods to refer to them consistently. To this end, we present QSoftCore, a conceptual model that reorganizes established QC concepts from a software engineering perspective and connects quantum applications, computational problems, algorithms, configurations, programs, and paradigm-specific computation specifications with state evolution, execution results, and backends. Our assessment against QSE literature across key software engineering activities indicates that QSoftCore provides shared QC referents for quantum computations, executions, deployment configurations, backends, and measurement evidence across the QSE lifecycle.
AI Summary
Quantum software engineering uses concepts drawn from mathematical, physical, and platform-specific descriptions of quantum computing. This paper asks how those concepts can be organized into a shared vocabulary connecting application requirements to computation design, deployment, and execution evidence. QSoftCore is a conceptual model expressed through UML class diagrams, organized into five views: applications and software systems; computation paradigms; gate-based computation; execution and evolution; and deployment. It distinguishes reusable algorithms from application-specific configurations, programs from computation specifications, and specifications from execution attempts. It covers circuits, analog Hamiltonian evolution, quantum annealing, and measurement-based computation, with more detail for gate-based systems. Execution concepts separate expected outcome probabilities, observed measurement statistics, inferred estimates, simulator state snapshots, and error-mitigated results. Deployment concepts record backend-specific artifacts, physical mappings, calibration context, and noise assumptions. Two worked examples map hybrid robot navigation and test-suite optimization onto these distinctions. The assessment qualitatively maps concepts used in selected QSE literature across requirements, architecture, code generation, deployment, and quality assurance to the model. It reports coverage of the reviewed works’ quantum-computing concepts and identifies their predominantly circuit-centered focus. There are no quantitative benchmarks or demonstrated improvements in engineering outcomes. The model explicitly reorganizes established concepts rather than introducing a quantum formalism. It is incomplete by design, gives unequal detail to different paradigms, and leaves task-specific software-engineering artifacts, implementation-level control flow, and detailed hardware characterization outside its scope. Its stated role is to support, not replace, existing engineering methods.
Error found: The supplied source contains seven caption-only figure environments, leaving the UML diagrams and referenced OCL constraints unavailable for checking the full conceptual specification. The paper defines decision problems as Boolean-output problems but classifies unrestricted learning labels and navigation action choices as decision outputs, contradicting its own classification.
Written by gpt-6.1-sol from the paper's full text. Automated: it can be wrong.