Benchmarking Hamiltonian Noise in the D-Wave Quantum Annealer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various sources of noise limit the performance of quantum computers by altering qubit states in an uncontrolled manner throughout computations and reducing their coherence time. In quantum annealers, this noise introduces additional fluctuations to the parameters defining the original problem Hamiltonian, such that they find the ground states of problems perturbed from those originally programmed. Here, we describe a method to benchmark the amount of noise affecting the programmed Hamiltonian of a quantum annealer. We show that a sequence of degenerate runs with the coefficients of the programmed Hamiltonian set to zero leads to an estimate of the noise spectral density affecting Hamiltonian parameters “in situ” during the quantum annealing protocol. The method is demonstrated in D-Wave's lower noise 2000 qubit device (DW_2000Q_6) and in its recently released 5000 qubit device (Advantage_system1.1). Our benchmarking of DW_2000Q_6 shows Hamiltonian noise dominated by the 1/f <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">0.7</sup> frequency dependence characteristic of flux noise intrinsic to the materials forming flux qubits. In contrast, Advantage_system1.1 is found to be affected by additional noise sources for low annealing times, with underlying intrinsic flux noise amplitudes 2-3 times higher than in DW_2000Q_6 for all annealing times.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it