Skip to content
aiqbench takeQuantum Computing

aiqbench analysis

This benchmark provides a practical comparison of style-based qGANs for high-energy physics data augmentation across IBM's superconducting and IonQ's trapped-ion architectures. While the trapped-ion system achieved marginally better model quality, the superconducting platform delivered significantly faster end-to-end runtimes, highlighting a clear application-specific tradeoff between fidelity and speed. These findings offer a baseline for evaluating native execution stacks rather than claiming algorithmic novelty.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Cross-platform hardware benchmark of style-based quantum GANs for data augmentation on superconducting and trapped-ion processors

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2405.04401v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: In the noisy intermediate-scale quantum era, controlled benchmarks of quantum machine-learning workloads across hardware modalities are needed to quantify how given algorithms behave under native provider execution stacks. This work presents such a benchmark for the style-based quantum generative adversarial network (qGAN) on a high-energy physics data-augmentation task. We compare two commercially available gate-model quantum computers: the IBM ibm_torino hardware, based on superconducting transmon qubits from the Heron chip and the IonQ aria-1 hardware, based on trapped-ion qubits. The generator architecture and trained parameters are kept fixed, and built-in mitigation is disabled when possible. We report quality and runtime metrics under each provider's native stack. The workflow uses circuit replication across available qubits, up to 48 on IBM and 24 on IonQ, to reduce the number of submitted jobs required for the target sample set. To our knowledge, this is one of the first controlled style-based qGAN hardware-to-hardware comparisons for this data-augmentation task. We observe that both platforms complete the task successfully, with marginal Kullback-Leibler divergences somewhat lower on aria-1, while end-to-end runtime is significantly shorter on ibm_torino. These results are an application-specific tradeoff benchmark, not a claim of algorithmic novelty.

Abstract:In the noisy intermediate-scale quantum era, controlled benchmarks of quantum machine-learning workloads across hardware modalities are needed to quantify how given algorithms behave under native provider execution stacks. This work presents such a benchmark for the style-based quantum generative adversarial network (qGAN) on a high-energy physics data-augmentation task. We compare two commercially available gate-model quantum computers: the IBM ibm_torino hardware, based on superconducting transmon qubits from the Heron chip and the IonQ aria-1 hardware, based on trapped-ion qubits. The generator architecture and trained parameters are kept fixed, and built-in mitigation is disabled when possible. We report quality and runtime metrics under each provider's native stack. The workflow uses circuit replication across available qubits, up to 48 on IBM and 24 on IonQ, to reduce the number of submitted jobs required for the target sample set. To our knowledge, this is one of the first controlled style-based qGAN hardware-to-hardware comparisons for this data-augmentation task. We observe that both platforms complete the task successfully, with marginal Kullback-Leibler divergences somewhat lower on aria-1, while end-to-end runtime is significantly shorter on ibm_torino. These results are an application-specific tradeoff benchmark, not a claim of algorithmic novelty.

28 pages, 11 figures, 2 tables. v2: Major revision including change of title to reflect better scope; added affiliation; matches published version

arXiv:2405.04401 [quant-ph]

(or arXiv:2405.04401v2 [quant-ph] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.04401 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0322308 Focus to learn more DOI(s) linking to related resources

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 312 words

Related coverage