Skip to content
aiqbench takeQuantum Computing

aiqbench analysis

This study rigorously benchmarks variational quantum eigensolvers against other dynamics simulation methods for solving partial differential equations, isolating algorithmic limits from sampling noise on state-vector simulators. The analysis reveals that observed performance gaps in noisy hardware runs are largely attributable to measurement shot limitations rather than inherent algorithmic inferiority, providing a clearer error budget for near-term quantum applications.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Performance evaluation of variational quantum eigensolver and quantum dynamics algorithms on the advection-diffusion equation

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2503.24045v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Near-term quantum algorithms are a promising route to solving partial differential equations, but gauging their true potential requires separating algorithmic performance from sampling and hardware noise. We benchmark a ground-state variational quantum eigensolver (VQE), cast as a variational quantum linear solver, against the Trotterization, variational quantum imaginary time evolution, and adaptive variational quantum dynamics simulation methods applied to the one-dimensional advection-diffusion equation in the recent quantum-dynamics study by Alipanah et al. [Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 043318 (2025)] at matched grid and problem size. On a noiseless state-vector simulator the $N=4$ VQE drives the final-time infidelity to a numerical floor ($\sim\!10^{-14}$) once the depth reaches $L\approx5$, an \emph{algorithmic ceiling} set by exact expectation values. Evaluating the same solver with a finite number $S$ of measurement shots, still without hardware noise, makes the infidelity sampling limited, following $1-f\approx c/S$ (a best-case readout-sampling estimate, with the solution's signs assumed known), providing a regime-matched comparison with the shot-based emulator of Alipanah \emph{et al.}\ and explaining the gap to their noisy hardware runs ($>10^{-1}$). The benchmark thus decomposes the near-term error budget into algorithmic, sampling, and hardware contributions, with a matched-depth resource comparison. The formulation applies without modification across $N=4,5,6$ qubits and to a two-dimensional (eight-qubit, $16\times16$) problem evolved to $t=1$, where the state-vector VQE holds a $\sim\!10^{-7}$ algorithmic-ceiling infidelity against the sampling-limited $\sim\!10^{-5}$ of the corresponding shot-based simulation, a difference of measurement regime rather than algorithmic superiority.

Abstract:Near-term quantum algorithms are a promising route to solving partial differential equations, but gauging their true potential requires separating algorithmic performance from sampling and hardware noise. We benchmark a ground-state variational quantum eigensolver (VQE), cast as a variational quantum linear solver, against the Trotterization, variational quantum imaginary time evolution, and adaptive variational quantum dynamics simulation methods applied to the one-dimensional advection-diffusion equation in the recent quantum-dynamics study by Alipanah et al. [Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 043318 (2025)] at matched grid and problem size. On a noiseless state-vector simulator the $N=4$ VQE drives the final-time infidelity to a numerical floor ($\sim\!10^{-14}$) once the depth reaches $L\approx5$, an \emph{algorithmic ceiling} set by exact expectation values. Evaluating the same solver with a finite number $S$ of measurement shots, still without hardware noise, makes the infidelity sampling limited, following $1-f\approx c/S$ (a best-case readout-sampling estimate, with the solution's signs assumed known), providing a regime-matched comparison with the shot-based emulator of Alipanah \emph{et al.}\ and explaining the gap to their noisy hardware runs ($>10^{-1}$). The benchmark thus decomposes the near-term error budget into algorithmic, sampling, and hardware contributions, with a matched-depth resource comparison. The formulation applies without modification across $N=4,5,6$ qubits and to a two-dimensional (eight-qubit, $16\times16$) problem evolved to $t=1$, where the state-vector VQE holds a $\sim\!10^{-7}$ algorithmic-ceiling infidelity against the sampling-limited $\sim\!10^{-5}$ of the corresponding shot-based simulation, a difference of measurement regime rather than algorithmic superiority.

13 pages, 4 figures. Published version

Quantum Physics (quant-ph); Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science (cs.CE); Emerging Technologies (cs.ET)

arXiv:2503.24045 [quant-ph]

(or arXiv:2503.24045v3 [quant-ph] for this version)

Phys. Rev. E 114, 025306 (2026)

https://doi.org/10.1103/mr76-1wtz DOI(s) linking to related resources

From: A. Barış Özgüler Ph.D. [view email] [v1] Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:09:59 UTC (293 KB) [v2] Mon, 28 Apr 2025 05:11:52 UTC (294 KB) [v3] Tue, 1 Sep 2026 17:46:54 UTC (241 KB)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 305 words

Related coverage