arXiv subjects

Andrew Wack

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew Wack.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

CLOPS: Benchmarking System Speed at Utility Scale

As quantum processors scale to hundreds of qubits, execution speed is a critical performance dimension alongside scale and quality. While substantial progress has been made in benchmarking circuit fidelity, existing speed metrics often fail to reflect the sustained, end-to-end throughput experienced by users running utility-scale workloads. This shortfall is especially pronounced for layered, parameterized circuits executed repeatedly within classical-quantum workflows, such as variational algorithms and error-mitigated simulations. In this work, we formalize CLOPS_h (Circuit Layer Operations Per Second) as a holistic speed benchmark defined over layered, hardware-aware circuits. CLOPS_h measures the sustained rate at which the system executes physical layers, parallel slices of qubit-disjoint two-qubit gates separated by synchronization barriers. Because each such layer is one time slice of an N-qubit circuit, this rate maps directly to the execution rate of layered $N$-qubit circuits, connecting CLOPS_h to published device capability claims, and to the device-level throughput ceiling we formalize as Max Circuits Per Second (MCPS). CLOPS_h is obtained under layer-fidelity operating conditions, binding the speed measurement to an independently verified quality envelope, and it shares its layer decomposition with scalable layer-fidelity (LF) quality benchmarks, enabling coherent interpretation of speed and quality without conflating the two.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2023

Defining Standard Strategies for Quantum Benchmarks

As quantum computers grow in size and scope, a question of great importance is how best to benchmark performance. Here we define a set of characteristics that any benchmark should follow -- randomized, well-defined, holistic, device independent -- and make a distinction between benchmarks and diagnostics. We use Quantum Volume (QV) [1] as an example case for clear rules in benchmarking, illustrating the implications for using different success statistics, as in Ref. [2]. We discuss the issue of benchmark optimizations, detail when those optimizations are appropriate, and how they should be reported. Reporting the use of quantum error mitigation techniques is especially critical for interpreting benchmarking results, as their ability to yield highly accurate observables comes with exponential overhead, which is often omitted in performance evaluations. Finally, we use application-oriented and mirror benchmarking techniques to demonstrate some of the highlighted optimization principles, and introduce a scalable mirror quantum volume benchmark. We elucidate the importance of simple optimizations for improving benchmarking results, and note that such omissions can make a critical difference in comparisons. For example, when running mirror randomized benchmarking, we observe a reduction in error per qubit from 2% to 1% on a 26-qubit circuit with the inclusion of dynamic decoupling.

quant-ph↗

arXiv2021

Quality, Speed, and Scale: three key attributes to measure the performance of near-term quantum computers

Defining the right metrics to properly represent the performance of a quantum computer is critical to both users and developers of a computing system. In this white paper, we identify three key attributes for quantum computing performance: quality, speed, and scale. Quality and scale are measured by quantum volume and number of qubits, respectively. We propose a speed benchmark, using an update to the quantum volume experiments that allows the measurement of Circuit Layer Operations Per Second (CLOPS) and identify how both classical and quantum components play a role in improving performance. We prescribe a procedure for measuring CLOPS and use it to characterize the performance of some IBM Quantum systems.

quant-ph↗