Evaluating the performance of QEC primitives on quantum processors at large width and depth

Abstract

Quantum error correction (QEC) relies on repeated parity extraction, mid-circuit measurement (MCM), reset, feed-forward, and scheduling, yet these primitives are usually assessed either in isolation or through resource-demanding experiments. We introduce a few-sample benchmark of QEC-relevant primitives based on an MCM implementation of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) with a fixed set of linear parameters (LR-QAOA). For a chosen code, the QAOA Hamiltonian is constructed from its check structure, such that the resulting circuit mimics the syndrome-extraction connectivity and MCM pattern while producing a direct algorithmic signal, the approximation-ratio r. The LR-QAOA depth, defined by the number of QAOA layers, plays a role analogous to the number of repeated syndrome-extraction rounds in a QEC experiment. From QPU executions, the decay of r with depth defines an effective hardware error, which we map to an equivalent two-qubit depolarizing rate λeff. We compare direct and MCM-mediated implementations across 10 QPUs from IBM, IQM, and Quantinuum, with circuits containing up to 2950 MCM operations. On Quantinuum's Helios-1 and H2-1, we run code-structured LR-QAOA benchmarks for surface-code, triangular color-code, and bivariate-bicycle qLDPC Hamiltonians up to 81, 91, and 48 data qubits, respectively, using up to 480 MCM operations. On IBM ibm_phoenix, we implement the surface-code structure and compare the LR-QAOA response with logical-memory experiments, observing a correlation between the benchmark and the logical performance across different regions of the QPU. Its construction and low resource requirements provide a practical benchmark for comparing hardware generations and QEC implementations before full logical-memory experiments are performed.

Abstract: arXiv descriptive metadata (CC0). Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. This service was not reviewed or approved by, nor does it necessarily express or reflect the policies or opinions of, arXiv.