aiqbench analysis
This research demonstrates that EPR-pair consumption is an unreliable proxy for execution time in distributed quantum computing, as identical communication costs can yield vastly different runtime results depending on the workload and latency conditions. The study highlights that optimizing solely for minimal EPR counts may lead to suboptimal performance, necessitating explicit communication-aware modeling for practical cluster deployments. These findings are critical for architects designing scalable quantum networks who must balance theoretical communication metrics against actual execution efficiency.
EPR Count for Runtime Prediction in Distributed Quantum Computing
arXiv:2609.39851v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: EPR-pair consumption is commonly used as a communication-cost objective in distributed quantum computing, but minimizing EPR cost does not necessarily minimize distributed execution time. Despite its widespread use, the reliability of EPR count as a runtime surrogate has received limited direct characterization across different workloads and communication conditions. This work addresses this gap by systematically evaluating the relationship between EPR cost and runtime over all balanced two-QPU mappings of QFT, QAOA, and CDKM circuits. The results show that mappings with identical EPR cost can have substantially different execution times, lower-EPR mappings can be slower, and minimum-EPR mappings can be runtime-suboptimal. The reliability of EPR count is strongly workload dependent and also changes with the communication operating regime: increasing EPR-generation latency amplifies runtime differences hidden by equal EPR cost, while increased communication concurrency can reduce the ability of EPR count to preserve runtime ordering. These results show that EPR count and execution time are related but distinct optimization objectives, and identify regimes in which explicit communication-aware runtime modeling is necessary.
Abstract:EPR-pair consumption is commonly used as a communication-cost objective in distributed quantum computing, but minimizing EPR cost does not necessarily minimize distributed execution time. Despite its widespread use, the reliability of EPR count as a runtime surrogate has received limited direct characterization across different workloads and communication conditions. This work addresses this gap by systematically evaluating the relationship between EPR cost and runtime over all balanced two-QPU mappings of QFT, QAOA, and CDKM circuits. The results show that mappings with identical EPR cost can have substantially different execution times, lower-EPR mappings can be slower, and minimum-EPR mappings can be runtime-suboptimal. The reliability of EPR count is strongly workload dependent and also changes with the communication operating regime: increasing EPR-generation latency amplifies runtime differences hidden by equal EPR cost, while increased communication concurrency can reduce the ability of EPR count to preserve runtime ordering. These results show that EPR count and execution time are related but distinct optimization objectives, and identify regimes in which explicit communication-aware runtime modeling is necessary.
Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing (cs.DC); Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
arXiv:2609.39851 [cs.DC]
(or arXiv:2609.39851v1 [cs.DC] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.39851 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 269 words
Related coverage
News Archive 2026
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026

Ukraine Quantum Computing Companies 2026: Complete Vendor Guide
Quantum Zeitgeist · Jul 19, 2026

Researchers Estimate Fidelity and Save Computation with New Quantum Scheduling System
Quantum Zeitgeist · Sep 10, 2026