skip to main content
10.1145/3508352.3549462acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiccadConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

MCQA: Multi-Constraint Qubit Allocation for Near-FTQC Device

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 December 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

In response to the rapid development of quantum processors, quantum software must be advanced by considering the actual hardware limitations. Among the various design automation problems in quantum computing, qubit allocation modifies the input circuit to match the hardware topology constraints. In this work, we present an effective heuristic approach for qubit allocation that considers not only the hardware topology but also other constraints for near-fault-tolerant quantum computing (near-FTQC). We propose a practical methodology to find an effective initial mapping to reduce both the number of gates and circuit latency. We then perform dynamic scheduling to maximize the number of gates executed in parallel in the main mapping phase. Our experimental results with a Surface-17 processor confirmed a substantial reduction in the number of gates, latency, and runtime by 58%, 28%, and 99%, respectively, compared with the previous method [18]. Moreover, our mapping method is scalable and has a linear time complexity with respect to the number of gates.

References

  1. M. A. Nielsen and I. Chuang. Quantum computation and quantum information. 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. F. Arute et al. "Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor". In: Nature 574.7779 (2019), pp. 505--510.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. P. Jurcevic et al. "Demonstration of quantum volume 64 on a superconducting quantum computing system". In: Quantum Science and Technology 6.2 (2021), p. 025020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. J. Preskill. "Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond". In: Quantum 2 (2018), p. 79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. J. Preskill. "Fault-tolerant quantum computation". In: Introduction to quantum computation and information. World Scientific, 1998, pp. 213--269.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. D. P. DiVincenzo. "Fault-tolerant architectures for superconducting qubits". In: Physica Scripta 2009.T137 (2009), p. 014020.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. D. Bacon. "Operator quantum error-correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories". In: Physical Review A 73.1 (2006), p. 012340.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. P. W. Shor. "Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory". In: Physical review A 52.4 (1995), R2493.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. A. G. Fowler, A. M. Stephens, and P. Groszkowski. "High-threshold universal quantum computation on the surface code". In: Physical Review A 80.5 (2009), p. 052312.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. A. G. Fowler et al. "Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation". In: Physical Review A 86.3 (2012), p. 032324.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. R. Versluis et al. "Scalable quantum circuit and control for a superconducting surface code". In: Physical Review Applied 8.3 (2017), p. 034021.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. T. Itoko et al. "Optimization of quantum circuit mapping using gate transformation and commutation". In: Integration 70 (2020), pp. 43--50.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. G. Li, Y. Ding, and Y. Xie. "Tackling the qubit mapping problem for NISQ-era quantum devices". In: Proc. ASPLOS. 2019, pp. 1001--1014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. P. Zhu, Z. Guan, and X. Cheng. "A dynamic look-ahead heuristic for the qubit mapping problem of NISQ computers". In: IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 39.12 (2020), pp. 4721--4735.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. A. Shafaei, M. Saeedi, and M. Pedram. "Qubit placement to minimize communication overhead in 2D quantum architectures". In: Proc. ASP-DAC. IEEE. 2014, pp. 495--500.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. S. Niu et al. "A hardware-aware heuristic for the qubit mapping problem in the nisq era". In: IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering 1 (2020), pp. 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. S. Park et al. "A fast and scalable qubit-mapping method for noisy intermediate-scale quantum computers". In: Proc. DAC. IEEE. 2022.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. L. Lao et al. "Timing and resource-aware mapping of quantum circuits to superconducting processors". In: IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. P. W. Shor. "Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer". In: SIAM review 41.2 (1999), pp. 303--332.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann. "A quantum approximate optimization algorithm". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.4028 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. Barenco et al. "Elementary gates for quantum computation". In: Physical review A 52.5 (1995), p. 3457.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. M. Amy, D. Maslov, and M. Mosca. "Polynomial-time T-depth optimization of Clifford+ T circuits via matroid partitioning". In: IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 33.10 (2014), pp. 1476--1489.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. L. E. Heyfron and E. T. Campbell. "An efficient quantum compiler that reduces T count". In: Quantum Science and Technology 4.1 (2018), p. 015004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. A. Kissinger and J. van de Wetering. "Reducing the number of non-Clifford gates in quantum circuits". In: Physical Review A 102.2 (2020), p. 022406.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. The Source code of multi-constraint qubit allocation (MCQA) Method. 2022. url: https://github.com/CSDL-postech/MCQA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. R. Wille et al. "RevLib: An online resource for reversible functions and reversible circuits". In: Proc. ISMVL. IEEE. 2008, pp. 220--225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. C.-C. Lin, A. Chakrabarti, and N. K. Jha. "Qlib: Quantum module library". In: ACM JETC 11.1 (2014), pp. 1--20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. MCQA: Multi-Constraint Qubit Allocation for Near-FTQC Device
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          ICCAD '22: Proceedings of the 41st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design
          October 2022
          1467 pages
          ISBN:9781450392174
          DOI:10.1145/3508352

          Copyright © 2022 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 22 December 2022

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate457of1,762submissions,26%

          Upcoming Conference

          ICCAD '24
          IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design
          October 27 - 31, 2024
          New York , NY , USA

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader