Practical Insights into Fair Comparison and Evaluation Frame for Neutral-Atom Compilers
Emil Khusainov, Yanbin Chen, Jonas Winklmann, Helmut Seidl, Christian B. Mendl

TL;DR
This paper introduces a unified evaluation framework and representation for neutral-atom quantum compilers, enabling fair comparison and revealing that previous performance gaps are often overstated.
Contribution
The authors present RSQASM, a standardized post-compilation representation, and provide tools to enable consistent evaluation of neutral-atom compiler performance.
Findings
Re-evaluation shows performance gaps are smaller than previously reported.
The framework reveals that some claimed advantages of certain compilers are not statistically significant.
Inconsistent evaluation metrics in prior work can lead to misleading conclusions.
Abstract
Neutral-atom quantum computing is among the most promising platforms for scalable quantum computation, and compilation toolchains are crucial for leveraging capabilities such as qubit shuttling and parallel gate execution. An important challenge, however, is that existing neutral-atom compilers are often evaluated using metrics computed over different parts of the toolchain and under non-equivalent assumptions. Consequently, fair quantification and comparison of compiler performance remain difficult. Reported metrics may depend on inconsistent transpilation optimization levels, different movement-duration models, different sets of considered fidelity sources, and even minor implementation bugs or undocumented representation choices. To address this problem, we present a unified and reproducible evaluation framework for neutral-atom compilers. Our framework introduces RSQASM (Routed and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
