Quantum Algorithm Exploration using Application-Oriented Performance Benchmarks

TL;DR

This paper enhances quantum benchmarking by introducing new application-specific tests, analyzing performance trade-offs, and extending the framework to complex algorithms like VQE, HHL, and machine learning applications.

Contribution

It presents a systematic method for expanding quantum benchmarks to more complex applications, including new algorithms and error mitigation techniques.

Findings

Increased problem size decreases accuracy but mildly increases runtime.

Benchmarking reveals trade-offs between gate synthesis accuracy and noise.

Error mitigation improves results with manageable overhead.

Abstract

The QED-C suite of Application-Oriented Benchmarks provides the ability to gauge performance characteristics of quantum computers as applied to real-world applications. Its benchmark programs sweep over a range of problem sizes and inputs, capturing key performance metrics related to the quality of results, total time of execution, and quantum gate resources consumed. In this manuscript, we investigate challenges in broadening the relevance of this benchmarking methodology to applications of greater complexity. First, we introduce a method for improving landscape coverage by varying algorithm parameters systematically, exemplifying this functionality in a new scalable HHL linear equation solver benchmark. Second, we add a VQE implementation of a Hydrogen Lattice simulation to the QED-C suite, and introduce a methodology for analyzing the result quality and run-time cost trade-off. We observe a decrease in accuracy with increased number of qubits, but only a mild increase in the execution time. Third, unique characteristics of a supervised machine-learning classification application are explored as a benchmark to gauge the extensibility of the framework to new classes of application. Applying this to a binary classification problem revealed the increase in training time required for larger anzatz circuits, and the significant classical overhead. Fourth, we add methods to include optimization and error mitigation in the benchmarking workflow which allows us to: identify a favourable trade off between approximate gate synthesis and gate noise; observe the benefits of measurement error mitigation and a form of deterministic error mitigation algorithm; and to contrast the improvement with the resulting time overhead. Looking ahead, we discuss how the benchmark framework can be instrumental in facilitating the exploration of algorithmic options and their impact on performance.