aiqbench analysis
This study exposes a critical "winner's curse" in hardware Variational Quantum Eigensolver (VQE) experiments, where finite-shot optimization artificially inflates reported energy accuracy. By independently re-evaluating selected parameter points after removing common epoch shifts, researchers found that most of the apparent advantage vanished, revealing that current accuracy claims often require rigorous independent verification to be valid.
The winner's curse in hardware VQE: drift-differenced remeasurement of finite-shot selection bias
arXiv:2609.27704v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Finite-shot optimization can make noisy variational quantum eigensolver energies look artificially accurate. We studied six molecules on two IBM Heron r3 processors in eight replicated cells. Seven optimizer-selected values fell below the exact active-space eigenvalue by up to mHa. Independent later evaluation of the selected and final parameter points, differenced to remove a common epoch shift, showed that most of the selected advantage disappeared: the primary recovery was (approximate 95% session-level interval). Across the reported aggregation choices, recovery estimates ranged from 0.892 to 0.989. The measured contrast was consistent in scale with finite-shot selection, while calibration drift and other sources of variation remain possible. Accuracy claims based on best-observed hardware VQE values therefore require an independent check.
Abstract:Finite-shot optimization can make noisy variational quantum eigensolver energies look artificially accurate. We studied six molecules on two IBM Heron r3 processors in eight replicated cells. Seven optimizer-selected values fell below the exact active-space eigenvalue by up to mHa. Independent later evaluation of the selected and final parameter points, differenced to remove a common epoch shift, showed that most of the selected advantage disappeared: the primary recovery was (approximate 95% session-level interval). Across the reported aggregation choices, recovery estimates ranged from 0.892 to 0.989. The measured contrast was consistent in scale with finite-shot selection, while calibration drift and other sources of variation remain possible. Accuracy claims based on best-observed hardware VQE values therefore require an independent check.
arXiv:2609.27704 [quant-ph]
(or arXiv:2609.27704v1 [quant-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.27704 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 · 208 words
Related coverage
Reverse-Engineering hipBLASLt TensileLite Kernels: From Solution Name to a Tuning Config
AMD · Aug 4, 2026
Completing or Refusing Low-Dimensional Records of Structured Quantum Circuits: Measurement Loss, Compression Loss, and Hardware Drift
arXiv · Sep 2, 2026
Iteratively Tuning hipBLASLt TensileLite Kernels: A Smaller Search, a Faster Kernel
AMD · Sep 9, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026