Network Operations Scheduling for Distributed Quantum Computing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Realizing distributed architectures for quantum computing is crucial to scaling up computational power. A key component of such architectures is a scheduler that coordinates operations over a short-range quantum network required to enable the necessary non-local entangling gates between quantum processing units (QPUs). It is desirable to determine schedules of minimum make span, which in the case of networks with constrained resources hinges on their efficient usage. Here we compare and contrast two approaches to solving the make span minimization problem, an approach based on the resource constrained project scheduling (RCPSP) framework, and another based on a greedy heuristic algorithm. The workflow considered is as follows. Firstly, the computational circuit is partitioned and assigned to different QPUs such that the number of nonlocal entangling gates acting across partitions is minimized while the qubit load is nearly uniform on the individual QPUs, which can be accomplished using, e.g., the METIS solver. Secondly, the nonlocal entangling gate requirements with respect to the partitions are identified, and mapped to network operation sequences that deliver the necessary entanglement between the QPUs. Finally, the network operations are scheduled such that the make span is minimized. As illustrative examples, we analyze the implementation of a small instance of the Quantum Fourier Transform algorithm over instances of a simple hub and spoke (star) network architecture comprised of a quantum switch as the hub and QPUs as spokes, each with a finite qubit resource budget. In one instance, our results show the RCPSP approach outperforming the greedy heuristic. In another instance, we find the two performing equally well. Our results thus illustrate the effectiveness of the RCPSP framework, while also underlining the relevance and usefulness of greedy heuristics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".