Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by EvgeniyZh 240 days ago
Quantum volume is a good metric but that's kind of one-dimensional take. Almost any interesting circuit doesn't requires all-to-all connectivity and superconducting QC are bad at all-to-all connected circuit so we can have interesting NISQ experiments without particularly large QV
1 comments
cashsterling 240 days ago
It is not a one dimensional take... it is a stress test of qubit gate fidelity [across all qubits involved in the circuit], state prep and measurement , lifetime (coherence), memory errors, etc.

Now I agree that there are other great stress tests of quantum computer systems... but most of the industry agreed that quantum volume was a great metric several years ago. As many companies systems have been unable to hit decent QV, companies have pivoted away from QV to other metrics... many of them are half baloney.

link
EvgeniyZh 240 days ago
> fidelity [across all qubits involved in the circuit]

I don't see a scenario in which the fidelity of 2QG between two far away qubits matter. Stress tests should be somehow related to the real tasks the system is intended to solve.

In case of quantum computers, the tasks are either NISQ circuits or fault-tolerant computation, and in both cases you can run them just fine without applying 2QG between far-away qubits that translate in large amount of swaps.

If you're interested in applying Haar-random unitaries, then surely QV is an amazing metric, and then systems with all-to-all connectivity is your best shot (coincidentally, Quantiniuum keeps publishing their quantum volume results). It's just not that interesting of a task.

link