Towards Fidelity-Optimal Qubit Mapping on NISQ Computers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantum computing is gaining momentum in revolutionizing the way we approach complex problem-solving. However, the practical implementation of quantum algorithms remains a significant challenge due to the error-prone and hardware limits of near-term quantum devices. For instance, physical qubit connections are limited, which necessitates the use of quantum SWAP gates to dynamically transform the logical topology during execution. In addition, to optimize fidelity, it is essential to ensure that 1) the allocated hardware has a low error rate and 2) the number of SWAP gates injected into the circuit is minimized. To address these challenges, we propose a suite of algorithms: the Fidelity-aware Graph Extraction Algorithm (FGEA) is used to identify the hardware region with the lowest probability of error, the Frequency-based Mapping Algorithm (FMA) allocates logical-physical qubits that reduce the potential distance of topological transformation, and the Heuristic Routing Algorithm (HRA) searches for an optimal swapping injection strategy. We evaluate the proposed algorithms on the IBM-provided Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) computer, using a dataset consisting of 17 different quantum circuits of various sizes. The circuits are executed on the IBM Toronto Falcon processor. The three proposed algorithms outperform the existing SABRE algorithm in reducing the number of SWAP gates required. Therefore, our proposed algorithms hold significant promise in enhancing the fidelity and reducing the number of SWAP gates required in implementing Quantum algorithms.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".