Comparing a Few Qubit Systems for Superconducting Hardware Compatibility and Circuit Design Sensitivity in Qiskit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of complex circuits for practical applications in the current quantum computing ecosystem is based on basic primitives such as Bell states, which provide superposition, entanglement, and coherence. The range of domain-specific quantum applications has been greatly expanded by the availability of simulators and platforms such as IBM Quantum, which are supported by Qiskit. However, disparities between ideal simulator outputs and actual quantum processing unit (QPU) executions in the Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) era require the application of quantum error mitigation techniques. Limitations arise from hardware constraints in superconducting qubit systems and from the limited resources of classical simulators as quantum circuits grow. Quantum decoherence, which lowers gate fidelity and builds up at the circuit level with increasing depth, is specifically caused by material-induced flaws and interfaces. This creates a clear connection between circuit reliability, device performance, and material attributes. To address this, the current work uses both simulation and actual hardware on the IBM Sherbrooke 127-qubit processor to study three basic circuit classes over 4 to 10 qubits: the quantum Fourier transform, the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state, and the W state. The study examines trade-offs between circuit complexity, noise robustness, and resource utilization by contrasting simulator and QPU results. The results imply that circuit fidelity can serve as an indirect probe of material-limited noise, opening the door to a framework for designing quantum circuits that accounts for both hardware and materials to achieve scalable quantum advantage.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".